K P Chandrasekharan Pillai vs Kerala State Electricity Board
2021 Latest Caselaw 617 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

    THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 17TH POUSHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.403 OF 2021(A)


PETITIONER:

               K P CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI,
               AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
               S/O. PARAMESHWARAN NAIR, KONDOORPUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE,
               MATHIL BHAGAM, THIRUVALLA POST, THIRUVALLA POST,
               PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. 686 575

               BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH T.JOHN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
               REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY
               BOARD, VYDYUTHIBHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

      2        EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
               KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVALLA DIVISION,
               PATHANAMTHITTA 689 110

      3        ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRCITY BOARD,
               MANIPUZHA ELECTRICAL SECTION, THIRUVALLA,
               PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 110

               SRI. SUDHEESH GANESH KUMAR - SC

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.403 OF 2021(A)

                                    2


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7th day of January 2021

The petitioner makes a limited plea that his complaint,

namely Ext.P2, be directed to be disposed of by the competent

Engineer of the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB), within

a time frame; and that until such time as orders are issued

thereon, disconnection of electric supply, based on the

demand made through Ext.P1, be stayed.

2. Sri.Sudheer Ganesh Kumar, the learned standing

counsel for the KSEB, in response, submitted that there is no

legal impediment in Ext.P2 being taken up and disposed of by

the second respondent and that this can be done after hearing

the petitioner also. He, however, prayed that this Court may

not make any affirmative declarations in favour of the

petitioner and allow the said Authority to take a decision on

Ext.P2 as per law.

3. Taking note of the afore submissions, I direct the

second respondent to take up Ext.P2 complaint of the

petitioner and dispose of the same, after affording an

opportunity of being heard to him - either physically or

through video conferencing - culminating in an appropriate WP(C).No.403 OF 2021(A)

decision thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later

than three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Needless to say, until such time as the afore exercise is

completed and resultant order communicated to the

petitioner, all action to disconnect supply to the petitioner's

premises, based on Ext.P1 demand, will stand deferred.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

                                           Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     Stu                                            JUDGE
 WP(C).No.403 OF 2021(A)




                               APPENDIX
     PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

     EXHIBIT P1       TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 11-08-2020

     EXHIBIT P2       TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE

PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENT ON 25/08/2020