Kerala High Court
The Assistant Engineer, Electrical ... vs Smt.Mable Atkinson on 4 April, 2024
Author: Murali Purushothaman
Bench: Murali Purushothaman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA,
1946
WP(C) NO. 6160 OF 2016
PETITIONER/S:
THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION,
KSEB LTD
ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB LTD., PERINAD,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.R.RAJAN,SC,K.S.E.B.
SRI.SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR R., SC, KERALA
STATE ELECTRICITY BO
G.KEERTHIVAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 SMT.MABLE ATKINSON
ALBINS, MATHIL P.O., THRIKADAVOOR VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-641 601.
2 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY APPELLATE
AUTHORITY
CC NO.51/52, NEAR 110 KV SUB STATION,
VYTTILA, KOCHI-682 019.
BY ADV SRI.ARUN BABU
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC 6160/2016
2
JUDGMENT
By Ext.P2 communication, the 1st respondent
was served with a provisional bill dated 7.10.2014
by the petitioner. Against Ext.P2, the 1st
respondent submitted Ext.P3 objection dated
13.10.2014 before the petitioner. On receipt of
Ext.P3 objection, the petitioner issued Ext.P4
communication dated 27.10.2014 to the 1st
respondent asking her to produce necessary
documents in support of her case. On 29.10.2014,
the petitioner issued Ext.P5 stating that since the
1st respondent has not produced any documentary
evidence to substantiate her contention, Ext.P2
provisional bill is finalised. Pursuant to Ext.P5,
Ext.P6 demand-cum-disconnection notice was
issued to the 1st respondent. Challenging Ext.P5,
the 1st respondent preferred Ext.P7 appeal under
Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 before the
appellate authority, the 2nd respondent.
2. The appellate authority as per Ext.P8
order, set aside Ext.P5 final assessment order
stating that there are two assessment orders
issued by the petitioner on 15.10.2014 and
29.10.2014. Accordingly, the petitioner was
directed to refund the amount already remitted by
the 1st respondent with interest. Ext.P8 order is
impugned by the petitioner contending that there
is only one final assessment order and Ext.P2 is
the provisional assessment which was made final
as per Ext.P5 dated 29.10.2014.
3. On going through the documents
produced by the petitioner, I find that Ext.P8
order has been passed by the appellate authority
under the mistaken impression that there are two
final bills. Ext.P2 is the provisional assessment
order and Ext.P5 is the final assessment order
which is dated 29.10.2014. There is no final
assessment order dated 15.10.2014 as referred to
in Ext.P8 order. Accordingly, Ext.P8 order is liable
to be set aside, and I do so.
4. On going through Ext.P5 final
assessment order, it can be seen that, Ext.P2
provisional order has been made final for the
reason that the 1st respondent failed to produce
the required documents. The 1st respondent
states that she was not afforded an opportunity of
hearing before issuing Ext.P5 and she did not get
sufficient opportunity to produce the required
documents in support of Ext.P3 objection. On a
perusal of Ext.P5, I find that, the same is a
cryptic order passed without any application of
mind. Accordingly, I set aside Ext.P5 and the
matter is remitted back to the petitioner to
consider Ext.P3 objection of the 1st respondent to
Ext.P2 provisional order in accordance with law
after affording an opportunity of hearing to the 1 st
respondent. The petitioner shall pass appropriate
orders as above expeditiously, at any rate, within
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
JUDGE
al/-.04.04.2024.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6160/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
P1 : COPY OF THE REPORT ON JOINT
INSPECTION AND SITE MAHASAR
DTD.1.10.2014.
P2 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
DTD.7.10.2014 OF THE PETITIONER
ALONG WITH PROVISIONAL BILL
DTD.7.10.2014.
P3 : COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS
DTD.13.10.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
P4 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
DTD.27.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P5 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
DTD.29.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P6 : COPY OF THE FINAL BILL
DTD.29.10.2014 ISSUED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.
P7 : COPY OF THE APPEAL
MEMORANDUM IN APPEAL NO.58/2014
FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
P8 : COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.15.9.2015
PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN
APPEAL NO.58/2014.
