Adv. Prabhu K N vs Kerala State Electiricity Board
2021 Latest Caselaw 20377 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

                                          &

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

                          ST
          FRIDAY, THE 1        DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943

                               WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

              ADV. PRABHU K.N,
              AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.K.T.NARAYANAN,
              REGHU NILAYAM, AMAKKULAM,
              VADAKKENCHERRY, P.O , ALATHUR THALUK,
              PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 683.

              BY ADV ADV. PRABHU K.N. (Party-In-Person)

RESPONDENTS:

     1        KERALA STATE ELECTIRICITY BOARD
              VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM P.O.,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA , PIN - 695 004
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

              RESPONDENT NO.1 AMENDED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.09.2021 IN IA
              1/2021 IN WP(C)NO. 11372/2021

     2        STATE OF KERALA
              REPT. BY SECRETARY, POWER DEPARTMENT,
              ROOM 373, 2ND FLOOR, MAIN BLOCK, SECRETARIAT
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.K.P.HARISH, SR. GP
              SRI.B.PREMOD, SC.
              SRI.SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR R.



      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.10.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021
                                    2

                                                                    "C.R."


                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of October, 2021

S.Manikumar, C.J.

Instant writ petition is filed by Mr. Prabhu K.N., party-in-

person, seeking for the following reliefs:

"i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to the 1st respondent to issue the electricity bill provided to the consumers in Malayalam, the vernacular language, to enable the consumers, the ordinary citizens, understand the contents of the same.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or directions to the 1st respondent not to title the Electricity bill provided by the 1 st respondent to the consumers as "DISCONNECTION NOTICE".

iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to the 1st respondent not to disconnect the service/Electricity connection of the consumers without serving a separate 15 days' notice for disconnection, as stipulated under Regulation 139(1) of Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014."

W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

2. Mr. Prabhu K.N., petitioner in person, has contended that

Regulation 122 of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 (for

short 'Supply Code, 2014') stipulates the general provisions

relating to billing. Regulation 123 stipulates the information to be

provided in the Electricity bill, by the Kerala State Electricity Board

('Board' for short), 1st respondent, to the consumers.

3. He has contended that even though it is not specifically

stipulated in the former statute that the Electricity bill provided

by the Board to the consumers, should be in vernacular language,

it is highly necessary that the Board to issue the Electricity bill

provided to the consumers in Malayalam, the vernacular language,

so as to enable an ordinary citizen to understand the contents of

the same, whereas the Board is issuing the Electricity bill provided

to the consumers in English.

4. He has further contended that the pattern/format of

Electricity bill, provided by the Board to the consumers, is per se

illegal, as it is titled as "DEMAND CUM DISCONNECTION NOTICE

(As per Regulations 122 and 123 of the Kerala Electricity Supply

Code, 2014)" in the prevailing circumstances, inter alia, that

Regulations 122 and 123 do not pertain to disconnection of W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

service/electricity connection.

5. He has further contended that ignoring the specific and

transparent stipulations under Regulations 138 and 139 of the

Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014 read with Section 56 of the

Electricity Act, 2003, Board is illegally making disconnection of

service/electric connection of the consumers, without issuing a

separate notice for disconnection, as stipulated under Regulation

139(1) of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2014, even in the

present pandemic situation.

6. Kerala State Electricity Board Limited - respondent No.1,

has filed a detailed counter affidavit refuting the allegations and

demands raised in the writ petition. It is submitted that the Board

is issuing the bill with all the details, as to the payment to be

made, date of the bill, due date of payment, and consequently,

the disconnection date. It is also pointed out that the

disconnection date contained in the bill is, after a period of 15

clear days from the due date provided in the bill.

7. In this regard, learned standing counsel has also invited

our attention to one of the bills produced by the writ petitioner.

8. Further contention made by the learned standing counsel W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

for the Kerala State Electricity Board is that the bill is issued in

accordance with Regulations 122 and 123 of the Kerala Electricity

Supply Code, 2014.

9. It is also pointed out that what is contemplated under

Regulation 139 of the Supply Code 2014 is only a notice in writing

with respect to the disconnection date.

10. In order to have a clarity to the issues raised by the

petitioner, as regards issuance of the bill, in vernacular, and a

separate notice, in contemplation of Regulation 139, and for

effectively considering and adjudicating the reliefs sought for,

relevant provisions are extracted:

"122. General provisions relating to billing.- (1) On effecting supply to any premises, the licensee shall inform the consumer the schedule for meter reading, billing and payment. (2) Any subsequent change in such schedule shall be brought to the notice of the consumer sufficiently in advance. (3) The licensee shall also intimate the consumer of bill dispatch through short message service (SMS) or email, if the consumer has furnished requisite details. (4) The billing details of last six bills along with payment receipt details for all consumers shall be made available on the website of the licensee.

(5) The bill shall be duly authenticated by the officer authorised for this purpose, who shall affix his dated signature, name and designation on the bill. (6) The licensee shall issue the first bill within a maximum of two billing cycles of energising a new connection.

(7) In case the consumer does not receive the first bill within W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

two billing cycles from the date of energisation of the connection, he shall intimate the same, in writing, to the office of the licensee and the licensee shall issue the bill within the next fifteen days if not already issued or issue a duplicate bill if the bill has already been issued.

(8) The bill shall be delivered to the consumer or his representative available at the premises immediately in the case of spot billing, under acknowledgment. (9) If nobody is available for acknowledging, the bill shall be deposited in the letter box if provided. (10) In all other cases, the licensee shall ensure that the bill is prepared and delivered to the consumer by hand or by post or by courier or by e-mail within three days from the date of meter reading and that the due date of payment is fixed as the tenth day from the date of meter reading or any day thereafter.

(11) If a consumer does not receive the bill within seven days of the date of issue of the bill, he may obtain a duplicate bill from the concerned billing office of the licensee. (12) The licensee shall issue a duplicate bill immediately if the consumer contacts the office of the licensee in person or telephonically:

Provided that, non-receipt of the bill shall not entitle the consumer to delay payment beyond the due date stipulated in the original bill."

"123. Information to be provided in the bill.- (1) The following information shall be included in the bill:-

(a) address and telephone number of the billing office or distribution centre;

(b) bill number and period of bill;

(c) name and address of the consumer and consumer number with location code;

(d) pole number, or distribution pillar reference from which connection is served and name of sub-division or centre;

(e) date of issue of bill;

(f) tariff category of consumer i.e. domestic, commercial, industrial etc.;

(g) tariff, rate of electricity duty and cess applicable; W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

(h) status of meter (OK /defective /not available);

(i) billing status (regular/ assessed/ provisional bill/ special bill with reason);

(j) supply details:-

(i) type of supply (i.e. single phase, three-phase LT, HT or EHT);

(ii) contracted load or connected load;

(k) meter number and identification details of meter (in case the meter was replaced during the billing period, the bill shall indicate the meter numbers of new as well as old meter, date of replacement, final reading of old meter and initial reading of new meter at the time of replacement of meter)

(l) opening meter reading with date;

(m) closing meter reading with date;

(n) multiplication factor of the meter if any;

(o) units consumed;

(p) maximum demand, power factor etc. if applicable;

(q) due date of payment;

(r) item wise billing details for the current month such as:-

(i) energy charges

(ii) fixed charges

(iii) meter rent, if any

(iv) capacitor surcharges

(v) other charges, if any

(vi) electricity duty

(viii) fuel cost adjustment charges

(ix) power factor adjustment charges, if any

(x) reactive energy charges, if any

xi) time of use charges, if any

(xii) penal charge for delay, if any

(xiii) interest on instalments due

(xiv) total demand for the current month W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

(xv) arrears (with details) (xvi) details of subsidy if any (xvii) others (with details) (xviii) total amount due (xviii) adjustment (xix) net amount to be paid

(s) modes of payment accepted;

(t) in case of cheques and bank drafts, the receiving authority in whose favour the amount shall be drawn; (u) security deposit held and required;

(v) advance already paid;

(w) details of last six readings:

(2) The following information shall also be provided along with the bill:-

(a) address of collection centre and their working hours;

(b) schedule of collection by mobile collection centre if any, at different venues;

(c) designation and address of the authority with whom grievance or complaints pertaining to bills may be lodged;

(d) address and telephone number of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and the Ombudsman constituted under Section 42 of the Act;

(e) tariff schedule applicable to the consumer;

(f) date of disconnection if payment is not made within the due date;

(g) complete address and telephone number of consumer service centre of the licensee, if any, for seeking clarification;

(h) additional information, if any, as desired by the licensee:

Provided that the bill shall not become invalid only because of any one or more items of information are absent in the bill."

W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

"138. Grounds for disconnection.- (1) The licensee shall not disconnect the supply of electricity to any consumer except on any one or more of the following grounds:-

(a) if the consumer defaults in payment of the dues payable to the licensee as per the bill or demand notice or any order issued by a competent authority, within the period stipulated therein;

(b) if the security provided by the consumer has become insufficient or the consumer fails to provide additional security as required by the licensee;

(c) if the consumer is found to have indulged in theft of electricity;

(d) if the failure to disconnect is likely to cause health hazard or safety risk or damage to property or to the consumer or to any other person;

(e) if the conduct or continuance of any business or industry or activity being carried out in any premises becomes unlawful due to lack of necessary permission from the competent authority or due to withdrawal of such permission by any competent authority;

(f) if the licensee is mandated to do so by an order of a legal authority, competent to issue such a mandate;

(g) if the licensee is entitled to do so under an agreement with the consumer;

(h) if the installation of the consumer does not comply with the applicable rules or any other reasonable requirements stipulated by the licensee;

(i) if the consumer has contravened the provisions of the Code or of the Act, which entitles the licensee to disconnect the supply;

(j) if the wiring, apparatus, equipment or installation at the premises of the consumer is found to be defective or unsafe or there is leakage of electricity;

(k) if the consumer is found to have altered the position of the meter and related apparatus or if the consumer uses any apparatus or appliance other than the ones authorised by the licensee;

W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

(l) if the consumer uses the energy in such a manner as to endanger the service lines, equipment, electric supply mains and other works of the licensee;

(m) if it is found that energy is being used in any manner which unduly or improperly interferes with the efficient supply of electricity to any other consumer;

(n) if at any time the consumer is found to be using energy for a purpose other than for which it was intended or provided;

(o) if the consumer extends or allows supply of electricity to any other premises from his connection without the permission of the licensee.

(p) if the supply of electricity to the consumer is liable to be disconnected as per any of the provisions in the Code.

(2) In the case of detection of theft of electricity, the supply of electricity shall be disconnected immediately as provided in subsection (1A) of Section 135 of the Act."

11. As per Regulation 138 of the Supply Code, 2014, the

licensee is empowered to disconnect the supply of electricity to

any consumer, if the consumer defaults in payment of dues,

payable to the licensee as per the bill or the demand notice, issued

by the competent authority.

12. Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under the

Supply Code, 2014, licensee is empowered to inform the consumer

that in the event of default in payment of bill within the stipulated

period, supply would be disconnected, in which case, no separate

notice, in terms of Regulation 139 of the Supply Code 2014, is

required. Regulation 139 of the Code reads thus: W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

"139. Procedure for disconnection.- (1) The licensee shall, in the case of disconnection proposed on the grounds mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of subregulation (1) of regulation 138 above, issue a disconnection notice in writing, as per Section 56 of the Act, with a notice period of not less than fifteen clear days, intimating the consumer about the grounds for disconnection and directing him to pay the dues with penal charges within the notice period.

(2) If the consumer fails to remit the dues within such notice period, the licensee may disconnect the service of the consumer on the expiry of the said notice period, by cutting off the supply in the manner as the licensee may deem fit:

Provided that the licensee shall not disconnect the supply to a consumer under this subregulation, if the consumer deposits under protest, an amount equal to the sum claimed from him or equal to the electricity charges due from him for each month, calculated on the basis of the average charge for electricity paid by him during the preceding six months whichever is less, pending disposal of any dispute between him and the licensee:

Provided further that the supply shall not be disconnected after 1:00 PM on any day or on holidays so that the consumer is not deprived of a chance to remit the dues on the same day and get re-connection.

(3) The licensee shall disconnect the supply to the consumer immediately if the disconnection is on the grounds in clauses

(c) and (d) of sub-regulation (1) of regulation 138 and the consumer may be given intimation to that effect soon after the disconnection.

W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

(4) In the case of disconnection as per clauses (e) to (p) of sub- regulation (1) of regulation 138, the supply shall be disconnected only after giving a notice for a period not less than seven clear days and intimating the consumer about the grounds for disconnection.

(5) The supply shall be disconnected only if the grounds of the disconnection as mentioned in clauses (e) to (p) of sub- regulation (1) of regulation 138 are not removed or rectified within the notice period.

(6) The licensee shall, after disconnection on the grounds mentioned in sub-regulation (1) of regulation 138, give intimation to the consumer as per format given in Annexure - 18 to the Code, to remove the cause of disconnection within forty five days, failing which the supply may be dismantled."

13. Heard the petitioner appearing in person Mr. Prabhu

K.N., an Advocate by profession, Mr. B. Premod, learned standing

counsel for the Electricity Board, and perused the pleadings and

the materials on record.

14. On the aspect of issuance of the bill, in vernacular

language, we are of the view that issuance of the bill is guided by

Regulation 122 of the Supply Code, 2014, and that, the petitioner

has no case that the bill is not issued in terms of the provisions of

the Supply Code, 2014.

15. Nowhere in Regulation 122, dealing with the general W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

provision relating to billing, it is stated that the bill has to be

issued in vernacular language. Convenience of the consumer,

though pleaded, does not satisfy the statutory requirement.

16. On the aspect as to when mandamus can be issued, we

deem it fit to consider the following decisions:

(i) In State of Kerala v. A. Lakshmi Kutty reported in (1986) 4 SCC 632, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, a Writ of Mandamus is not a writ of course or a writ of right but is, as a rule, discretionary. There must be a judicially enforceable right for the enforcement of which a mandamus will lie. The legal right to enforce the performance of a duty must be in the applicant himself. In general, therefore, the Court will only enforce the performance of statutory duties by public bodies on application of a person who can show that he has himself a legal right to insist on such performance. The existence of a right is the foundation of the jurisdiction of a Court to issue a writ of Mandamus.

(ii) In Comptroller and Auditor General of India v. K.S.Jegannathan, reported in AIR 1987 SC 537 - (1986) 2 SCC 679, a Three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to Halsbury's Laws of England 4 th Edition, Vol. I, Paragraph 89, about the efficacy of mandamus:

"89. Nature of Mandamus.-- .... is to remedy defects of justice; and accordingly it will issue, to the end that justice may be done, in all cases where there is a specific legal right and no specific legal remedy, for enforcing that right;

and it may issue in cases where, although there is an alternative legal remedy, yet that mode of redress is less convenient, beneficial and W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

effectual."

(iii) In Raisa Begum v. State of U.P., reported in 1995 All.L.J. 534, the Allahabad High Court has held that certain conditions have to be satisfied before a writ of mandamus is issued. The petitioner for a writ of mandamus must show that he has a legal right to compel the respondent to do or abstain from doing something. There must be in the petitioner a right to compel the performance of some duty cast on the respondents. The duty sought to be enforced must have three qualities. It must be a duty of public nature created by the provisions of the Constitution or of a statute or some rule of common law.

(iv) Writ of mandamus cannot be issued merely because, a person is praying for. One must establish the right first and then he must seek for the prayer to enforce the said right. If there is failure of duty by the authorities or inaction, one can approach the Court for a mandamus. The said position is well settled in a series of decisions.

(a) In State of U.P. and Ors. v. Harish Chandra and Ors., reported in (1996) 9 SCC 309, at paragraph 10, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows:

"10. ...Under the Constitution a mandamus can be issued by the court when the applicant establishes that he has a legal right to the performance of legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought and the said right was subsisting on the date of the petition...."

(b) In Union of India v. S.B. Vohra reported in (2004) 2 SCC 150, the Hon'ble Apex Court has considered the said issue and held that,- 'for issuing a writ of mandamus in favour of a person, the person claiming, must establish his legal right W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

in himself. Then only a writ of mandamus could be issued against a person, who has a legal duty to perform, but has failed and/or neglected to do so."

(c) In Oriental Bank of Commerce v. Sunder Lal Jain reported in (2008) 2 SCC 280, at paragraphs 11 and 12, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows:-

"11. The principles on which a writ of mandamus can be issued have been stated as under in The Law of Extraordinary Legal Remedies by F.G. Ferris and F.G. Ferris, Jr.:

"Note 187.- Mandamus, at common law, is a highly prerogative writ, usually issuing out of the highest court of general jurisdiction, in the name of the sovereignty, directed to any natural person, corporation or inferior court within the jurisdiction, requiring them to do some particular thing therein specified, and which appertains to their office or duty. Generally speaking, it may be said that mandamus is a summary writ, issuing from the proper court, commanding the official or board to which it is addressed to perform some specific legal duty to which the party applying for the writ is entitled of legal right to have performed.

Note 192.- Mandamus is, subject to the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, the appropriate remedy to enforce a plain, positive, specific and ministerial duty presently existing and imposed by law upon officers and others who refuse or neglect to perform such duty, when there is no other adequate and specific legal remedy and without which there would be a failure of justice. The chief function of the writ is to compel the performance of public duties prescribed by statute, and to keep subordinate and inferior bodies and tribunals exercising public functions within their jurisdictions. It is not necessary, however, that the duty be imposed by statute; mandamus lies as well for the enforcement of a common law duty.

Note 196.- Mandamus is not a writ of right. Its issuance unquestionably lies in the sound judicial discretion of the court, subject always to the well-

W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

settled principles which have been established by the courts. An action in mandamus is not governed by the principles of ordinary litigation where the matters alleged on one side and not denied on the other are taken as true, and judgment pronounced thereon as of course. While mandamus is classed as a legal remedy, its issuance is largely controlled by equitable principles. Before granting the writ the court may, and should, look to the larger public interest which may be concerned-an interest which private litigants are apt to overlook when striving for private ends. The court should act in view of all the existing facts, and with due regard to the consequences which will result. It is in every case a discretion dependent upon all the surrounding facts and circumstances.

Note 206.--......The correct rule is that mandamus will not lie where the duty is clearly discretionary and the party upon whom the duty rests has exercised his discretion reasonably and within his jurisdiction, that is, upon facts sufficient to support his action."

12. These very principles have been adopted in our country. In Bihar Eastern Gangetic Fishermen Cooperative Society Ltd. v. Sipahi Singh and others, AIR 1977 SC 2149, after referring to the earlier decisions in Lekhraj Satramdas Lalvani v. Deputy Custodian-cum-Managing Officer, AIR 1966 SC 334; Dr. Rai Shivendra Bahadur v. The Governing Body of the Nalanda College, AIR 1962 SC 1210 and Dr. Umakant Saran v. State of Bihar, AIR 1973 SC 964, this Court observed as follows in paragraph 15 of the reports :

"15. .......... There is abundant authority in favour of the proposition that a writ of mandamus can be granted only in a case where there is a statutory duty imposed upon the officer concerned and there is a failure on the part of the officer to discharge the statutory obligation. The chief function of a writ is to compel performance of public duties prescribed by statute and to keep subordinate Tribunals and officers exercising public functions within the W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

limit of their jurisdiction. It follows, therefore, that in order that mandamus may issue to compel the authorities to do something, it must be shown that there is a statute which imposes a legal duty and the aggrieved party has a legal right under the statute to enforce its performance. .... In the instant case, it has not been shown by respondent No. 1 that there is any statute or rule having the force of law which casts a duty on respondents 2 to 4 which they failed to perform. All that is sought to be enforced is an obligation flowing from a contract which, as already indicated, is also not binding and enforceable. Accordingly, we are clearly of the opinion that respondent No. 1 was not entitled to apply for grant of a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution and the High Court was not competent to issue the same."

(v) When a Writ of Mandamus can be issued, has been summarised in Corpus Juris Secundum, as follows:

"Mandamus may issue to compel the person or official in whom a discretionary duty is lodged to proceed to exercise such discretion, but unless there is peremptory statutory direction that the duty shall be performed mandamus will not lie to control or review the exercise of the discretion of any board, tribunal or officer, when the act complained of is either judicial or quasi-judicial unless it clearly appears that there has been an abuse of discretion on the part of such Court, board, tribunal or officer, and in accordance with this rule mandamus may not be invoked to compel the matter of discretion to be exercised in any particular way. This principle applies with full force and effect, however, clearly it may be made to appear what the decision ought to be, or even though its conclusion be disputable or, however, erroneous the conclusion reached may be, and although there may be no other method of review or correction provided by law. The discretion must be exercised according to the established rule where the action complained has been arbitrary or capricious, or based on personal, selfish or W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

fraudulent motives, or on false information, or on total lack of authority to act, or where it amounts to an evasion of positive duty, or there has been a refusal to consider pertinent evidence, hear the parties where so required, or to entertain any proper question concerning the exercise of the discretion, or where the exercise of the discretion is in a manner entirely futile and known by the officer to be so and there are other methods which it adopted, would be effective."

(emphasis supplied)

17. Moreover, whenever a bill is issued, what is important is

the data contained in the bill in regard to the bill date, due date,

and the disconnection date in the event of default. In fact,

contents of a bill are clearly guided by the provision of law and,

therefore, the authority functioning under the laws is duty bound

to follow the said prescriptions scrupulously.

18. To put it otherwise, there are many details required to

be contained in the bill, notifying a consumer as to what he should

do. In our view, statute does not warrant issuance of a bill, in

vernacular language. As there is no requirement under the law to

issue the bill in vernacular, as per the provisions of the Electricity

Act, 2003 or any of the regulations made by the Board under the

Act, 2003, the petitioner cannot insist that the bill should be

issued in vernacular.

W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

19. Moreover, it is not the case of the petitioner that he is

unable to understand the contents of the bill, more particularly of

the fact that he is an Advocate.

20. There are no materials to support the contention that no

person has raised any objection with regard to the nature of the

bill issued by the Board complaining about the understandability,

for want of proficiency in English language. Judicial notice can be

taken that the literacy rate of Kerala is high. Therefore, we do not

find any reason to direct the respondents, to issue the bill, in

vernacular, and we also do not think that any public interest is

involved in the said issue.

21. On the issue that a separate disconnection notice under

Regulation 139 is mandated, it could be seen, Regulation 139

emphasises that a disconnection notice in writing to be issued as

per Section 56 of the Act, 2003, stipulating that a notice period of

not less than 15 clear days, intimating the consumer about the

grounds for disconnection and directing him to pay the dues with

penal charges, within the notice period.

22. Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 139 makes it clear that

if the consumer fails to remit the dues, within such notice period, W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

the licensee may disconnect the service of the consumer on the

expiry of the said notice period, by cutting of the supply, in the

manner, as the licensee may deem fit.

23. Let us consider as to what, the licensee in the bill, has

stated, as under:

"Bill Date : 12/05/2021 Due Date : 22/05/2021 Disconn Dt: 07/06/2021"

24. Notice in writing, as contemplated in Section 56 of the

Electricity Act, 2003, reads thus:

"Section 56. (Disconnection of supply in default of payment): - (1) Where any person neglects to pay any charge for electricity or any sum other than a charge for electricity due from him to a licensee or the generating company in respect of supply, transmission or distribution or wheeling of electricity to him, the licensee or the generating company may, after giving not less than fifteen clear days' notice in writing, to such person and without prejudice to his rights to recover such charge or other sum by suit, cut off the supply of electricity and for that purpose cut or disconnect any electric supply line or other works being the property of such licensee or the generating company through which electricity may have been supplied, transmitted, distributed or wheeled and may discontinue the supply until such charge or other sum, W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

together with any expenses incurred by him in cutting off and reconnecting the supply, are paid, but no longer:

Provided that the supply of electricity shall not be cut off if such person deposits, under protest, -

(a) an amount equal to the sum claimed from him, or

(b) the electricity charges due from him for each month calculated on the basis of average charge for electricity paid by him during the preceding six months, whichever is less, pending disposal of any dispute between him and the licensee.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no sum due from any consumer, under this section shall be recoverable after the period of two years from the date when such sum became first due unless such sum has been shown continuously as recoverable as arrear of charges for electricity supplied and the licensee shall not cut off the supply of the electricity. "

25. Regulation 139 of the Supply Code, 2014, is an

information to the consumer.

26. On the aspect as to what 'notice' means and its purpose,

we deem it fit to consider the following:

"In a recent judgment in V.D.S.R.Re. Rolling Mill v. Special Commissioner & Commissioner of Land Administration reported in 2012 (5) MLJ 817, the Hon'ble Madras High Court considered the meaning to the word "notice". In paragraph Nos.107 W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

to 115, this Court has considered the term 'notice' as follows:

"107. Notice is the making something known, of what a man was or might be ignorant of before. And it produces divers effects, for, by its, the party who gives the same shall have some benefit, which otherwise he should not have had; the party to whom the Notice is given is made subject to some action or charge, that otherwise he had not been liable to; and has estate in danger of prejudice. (Co. Lit. 309 TOMLINS LAW DICTIONARY).

108. Actual Notice is "When there is positive information of a fact," It is "Actual knowledge by the party of the very matter or thing, of which he is said to have notice," "It consists in express information of the fact." It is "knowledge brought directly home to the party." "However closely actual notice may be in many instances approximate knowledge, there my be actual notice without knowledge." (See 29 Ame. Cyc.1113)

109. Constructive Notice, defines "Legal inference from established facts." "Notice imputed by the law to a person not having actual notice." "Knowledge of any fact which would put a prudent man upon inquiry." "Knowledge of such facts as should induce inquiry, and as would lead to injury in the case of an ordinarily prudent man and which cannot be neglected without a voluntary closing of the eyes, and conduct inconsistent with good faith."

110. Notice, in its legal sense, may be defined as "information concerning a fact actually communicated to a party by an authorised person, or actually derived by him from a proper source, or else presumed by law to have been acquired by him, which information is regarded as equivalent to knowledge in its legal consequences. (13 All 171: 30 B.275)

111. The adherence to principles of natural justice as recognised by all civilised States is of supreme importance when a quasi-judicial body embarks on determining disputes between the parties. These principles are well settled. The first and foremost principle is what is commonly known as audi alteram partem rule. It says that no one should be condemned unheard. Notice is the first limb of this principle. It W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

must be precise and unambiguous. It should apprise the party determinately the case he has to meet. Time given of the purpose should be adequate so as to enable him to make his representation. In the absence of a notice of the kind and such reasonable opportunity the order passed against the person in absentia becomes wholly vitiated. Thus, it is but essential that a party should be put on Notice of the case before any adverse order is passed against him. This is one of the most important principles of natural justice. It is after all an approved rule of fairplay. Another principle of natural justice is popularly known as rule against bias. A third one is that the party when requested should be given a copy of the order passed against him, containing the reasons for the adverse order. (Hurhanuddin Hussain v. State of U.P., AIR 1970 AP 137)

112. The word "Notice" means intimation, information, cognizance or observance, "notice" implies knowledge and this knowledge comes from direct perception or from inference reasonably arising out of several facts and circumstances. (Manick Lal Seal v.

K.P.Choudhary, AIR 1976 Cal.115)

113. The word 'Notice' means intimation announcement, information, warning, cognizance, observation, "Notice" implies knowledge and this knowledge may come from direct perception or from inference reasonably arising out of several facts and circumstances which are manifest on plaint averments. (Kanchanbai v. Khetidas, (1991) 1 Civil LJ 553)

114. 'Notice' is originated from Latin word 'notifia' which means 'a being know', knowing is wide enough in legal circle to include plaint filed in suit, notice in its legal sense, is, information concerning fact actually communicated to party by authorised person or actually derived by him from proper sources or else presumed by law to have been acquired by him, which information is regarded as equivalent to knowledge in its legal consequences. [Commissioner of Sales Tax and Others v. Subhash & Co., AIR 2003 SC 1623: (2003) 3 SCC 454]"

27. What is relevant and important, contained in Regulation W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

139 of the Supply Code, 2014 is that there should be a 15 days'

clear notice informing the consumer that the power supply would

be disconnected, if the consumer defaults in the payment of the

electricity bill. Power connection can be disconnected by the

Board for various reasons as are specified in Regulation 138.

Therefore, if the power has to be disconnected for any other

reason other than for non-payment of the electricity dues, the

petitioner may be correct that the Board should have to issue a

notice intimating the consumer that for the reasons assigned

therein, power connection has to be disconnected and that notice,

if issued separately, should mention the sufficient period as

prescribed under regulation 139 of the Supply Code 2014.

28. This we say because under Regulation 123(1)(q), the due

date of the bill amount has to be shown compulsorily. Similarly,

under Regulation 123(2)(f), the date of disconnection, if payment

is not made within the due date, is also to be notified.

29. A conjoint reading of Regulations 123 and 139, as

discussed above, makes it clear that the notice of disconnection

needs to be notified in the bill itself, incorporating the imperative

condition of 15 days clear notice, to be provided. W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

30. For the reason that payment of the bill amount, specified

in Regulation 139, is informed to the consumer, in the monthly bill

and the consequences, likely to occur departing from the payment

of the bill amount and the disconnection in case of default, is

specified though not by a specific order in writing. The consumer is

appraised of the payment, default and its consequences.

31. As far as the State of Kerala is concerned, electricity is

supplied by the Board throughout the State. If a separate notice is

to be mandated, so far as the non-payment of electricity dues is

concerned, it would be a laborious process, for the Board spending

huge money from the public exchequer.

32. A notice in writing means, it should be made clear in

black and white that if the consumer is not paying the bill within

the time period prescribed in the bill, the Board will be at liberty

to disconnect the supply after 15 clear days' notice. What the

consumer is required, information as to the due date for payment

and if not done, what is the consequence thereof is it not provided

in the bill. Answer is 'yes'. The said aspect is clearly mentioned in

the bill itself and therefore, the contentions raised by the

petitioner that there should be a separate notice issued before W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

the power is disconnected cannot be sustained under law.

33. Said issue has been considered by the Karnataka High

Court in Karnataka Electricity Board and Another v.

B.P.Vasudeva Murthy and Another (2001 KHC 3440=AIR 2001

Kar. 228), under the provisions of the Karnataka Electricity Board

Electricity Supply Regulations, 1988, wherein Regulation No.30.06

deals with disconnection of supply. In the said decision, a

stipulation is incorporated on the reverse side of the electricity

bill, that if bill is not paid by the consumer within the time fixed,

the Board is competent to disconnect installation and interpreting

the said provision, it was held that it can be construed as giving 7

days' notice, as per the Regulation and, therefore, issuance of

separate notice to the consumer calling upon him to pay

consumption charges within seven days, failing which power

supply would be disconnected, is not necessary. Even though the

same was considered before the introduction of the Electricity

Act, 2003 and on the basis of a regulation made under the

Electricity Act, 1910, the same analogy squarely applies to the

instant case.

34. Taking into account all the above legal and factual W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold that the petitioner is

not entitled to get any relief sought for in the writ petition.

For the abovesaid reasons, this writ petition fails and

accordingly, dismissed.

Sd/-

S.Manikumar Chief Justice

Sd/-

Shaji P.Chaly Judge vpv W.P.(C)No.11372 of 2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTRICITY BILL ISSUED TO A CONSUMER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.05.2021.

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE