E.Joseph Simon vs Kerala State Electricity Board ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 7775 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR

     FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.5820 OF 2021(B)


PETITIONER:

               E.JOSEPH SIMON
               AGED 71 YEARS
               S/O.SIMON, CON.NO.28525, KUMARAN- ASAN JUNCTION,
               ERNAKULAM.

               BY ADV. SMT.C.K.SHERIN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHYUTHI BHAVAN,
               PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.

      2        KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY APPELLATE AUTHORITY
               VYTILA, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM - 682 019.

      3        DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (APTS)
               KSEB LIMITED ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -
               682 011.

      4        ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
               KSEB LIMITED, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, ERNAKULAM,
               KOCHI - 682 011.

      5        ASSISTANT ENGINEER
               ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB LIMITED, COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM,
               KOCHI - 682 011.



               SC- SRI. N.SATHEESH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.5820 OF 2021(B)

                                  2

                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 5th day of March 2021

Learned standing counsel takes notice for respondent Nos.1, 3, 4

and 5.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. She

made the following submissions.

a. The petitioner is a consumer and owner of a four storey

building which was rented out to a fitness center from June 2018. The

petitioner had applied for additional load to the Electricity Board in

November, 2018 and that request was approved on 21.12.2018.

Accordingly, the petitioner had done additional wiring which was also

inspected by the concerned inspector. However, in the meanwhile,

premises of the petitioner were inspected on 20.05.2019.

b. After inspection of the premises of the petitioner, a mahazar,

Ext.P1 was prepared by the inspecting officer mentioning the fact that

the Gymnasium was with approved load of 5000 watts. It is further

mentioned that this gymnasium in the premises was having several

electrical equipments and the consumption was found recorded upto

37.24 KWa. The petitioner was then served with Ext.P2 provisional

demand followed by Ext.P3 final bill. The petitioner was directed to

pay an amount of Rs.6,16,934/- for unauthorised additional load. It WP(C).No.5820 OF 2021(B)

was stated in this final bill that the load detected during inspection

was 42 KWa. The petitioner approached this Court by filing

WP(C) No. 17708/2019 which was decided on 20.06.2019 by directing

the respondent to hear the petitioner and then to pass final order. That

is how, the final order at Ext.P5 came to be passed by the respondent

Electricity Board by holding that the additional load consumed by the

petitioner has to be treated as unauthorised use of electricity and

therefore, the petitioner is liable to pay the assessed amount of

Rs.6,16,934/-.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the

petitioner wants to approach the Kerala State Electricity Appellate

Authority, the 2nd respondent herein, by filing a statutory appeal under

Section 127 of the Electricity Act and that remedy is also informed to

the petitioner vide final order at Ext.P5. However, the learned counsel

for the petitioner, by drawing my attention to the grounds raised in the

instant petition has argued that the petitioner is suffering from kidney

failure and has to undergo dialysis on alternate days. Because of

spread of Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner is unable to raise such a

huge amount and therefore, the appeal which is to be filed by the

petitioner be directed to be entertained by the 2 nd respondent on

receipt of Rs.50,000/- from the petitioner. WP(C).No.5820 OF 2021(B)

4. The learned counsel appearing for the Electricity Board

opposed the petition by contending that requirement of pre-deposit of

50% of the final assessment is a statutory requirement prescribed by

Section 127 of the Electricity Act and that cannot be either waived or

reduced by this Court.

5. I have considered the submissions so advanced. At this

juncture, it needs to be pointed out that Section 127 of the Electricity

Act provides for the remedy of appeal to the Appellate Authority and

any person aggrieved by the final order made under Section 126 of

the Electricity Act can prefer the appeal in the prescribed form and

that appeal has to be accompanied by pre-deposit of 50% of the final

assessment. Section 127 does not provide for any remission in the

amount equal to half of the assessed amount. That discretion is

neither vested with the Appellate Authority, nor with this Court.

In this view of the matter, this petition is devoid of merit and the

same is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.M.BADAR JUDGE Nsd

//true copy//

PA to Judge WP(C).No.5820 OF 2021(B)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SITE MAHAZAR DATED 20/5/2019 PREPARED BY ANTI POWER THEFT SQUAD OF THE KSEB LTD. WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF PROVISIONAL BILL DATED 22/05/2019 ALONG WITH A COMMUNICATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF FINAL BILL DATED ALONG WITH A COMMUNICATION AND DATED 04/06/2019 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28/06/2019 IN WP(C) NO.17708/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER DATED 09/02/2021 PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.