The Kerala State Electricity ... vs The Kerala State Consumer ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3668 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1944
                       WP(C) NO. 27086 OF 2014
PETITIONER/S:

    1          THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (ADMINISTRATION),
               VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
               PIN-695 004.
    2          THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER
               THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED,
               ELECTRICAL SECTION, MELOOR, TRICHUR.
               BY ADV SRI.T.R.RAJAN,SC,K.S.E.B.


RESPONDENT/S:

    1          THE KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
               COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY
               ITS SECRETARY, PIN-695 033.
    2          THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
               THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. PIN-680
               003.
    3          N.T.JOSE
               NETTIKKADAN HOUSE, MELOOR, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR.
               680 311.
               SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
        THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   24.03.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                      -2-
W.P.(C). No. 27086 of 2014



                             P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                             ======================================================

                              W.P.(C) No. 27086 of 2014
                       =============================================================

                   Dated this the 24th day of March, 2022

                                          JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

I. Call for records leading to Exhibit P8 and P10 orders and quash the same by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction.

II. Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Honble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case." (Sic)

2. The petitioners are challenging Exts.P8 and P10

orders in this writ petition. The case of the petitioners is thus:

The 3rd respondent filed a complaint before the 2nd respondent

with certain grievances. The 2nd respondent forum passed

Ext.P3 interim order, by which the 3rd respondent was allowed

to replace an electric meter and fix a new meter. Subsequently,

the 3rd respondent filed Ext.P5 application alleging violation of

the order before the 2nd respondent. The petitioners submitted

W.P.(C). No. 27086 of 2014

objections as evident by Ext.P6. Without considering Ext.P6,

the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P8 order issuing bailable warrant.

Ext.P8 was challenged by the petitioners before the State

Consumer Redressal Forum by filing a revision. The revision

was also dismissed as per Ext.P10 order. Aggrieved by the

same, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned Government Pleader.

4. This writ petition is pending before this Court from

2014 onwards. The proceedings before the 2nd respondent is

stayed by this Court and the same is still in force. The

grievance of the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent passed

bailable warrant even without giving an opportunity of hearing

and without considering the objections submitted by the

petitioners.

W.P.(C). No. 27086 of 2014

5. In such circumstances, according to me, Exts.P8 and

P10 can be set aside and the 2 nd respondent can be directed to

reconsider the matter, after affording an opportunity of hearing

to the petitioners and the 3rd respondent. All the contentions of

the petitioners and the 3rd respondent can be left open.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following

manner:

1. Exts.P8 and P10 are set aside.

2 The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter and pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the 3 rd respondent, in accordance to law.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE das

W.P.(C). No. 27086 of 2014

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27086/2014

PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC NO.795 OF 2008 FILED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT ON THE FILES OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

P2- TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE WRIT PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.795 OF 2008 ON THE FILES OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

P3- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.1.2009 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN I.A.NO.9 A/2009 IN C.C.NO.795/2008. P4- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 5.1.2009 OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS. P5- TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION IN EA NO.216/2009 IN IA NO.9A/2009 IN C.C.NO.795/2008 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

P6- TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE WRIT PETITIONERS TO EXHIBIT P5.

P7- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM APPEARANCE SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. P8- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.10.2013 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN EA NO.216/2009 IN IA NO.9A/2009 IN CC NO.795/2008.

P9- TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION IN R.P.NO.372/2013 ON THE FILES OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT FILED BY THE WRIT PETITIONERS.

P10- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.2.2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN R.P.NO.372/2013.