[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Oxygen The Digital Shop vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd on 18 February, 2026
2026:KER:14810
W.P.(C) No.32240 of 2018
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 29TH MAGHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 32240 OF 2018
PETITIONER:
OXYGEN THE DIGITAL SHOP
MOBILE AND LAPTOP CIVISION, XIV/748, DOOR
NO.107A, GROUND FLOOR, KINATTUMOOTTIL BUILDING,
M.C.ROAD, NAGAMPADOM, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER MR.JOB ABRAHAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SAJI MATHEW
SRI.DENU JOSEPH
SMT.NEETHU REGHUKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD.,
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
2 THE ASSESSING OFFICER/ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE
ENGINEEER,
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., ELECTRICAL
SUB DIVISION, KOTTAYAM.
BY ADV SRI.G.KEERTHIVAS
SRI. RIJI RAJENDRAN, SC.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 18.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:14810
W.P.(C) No.32240 of 2018
-2-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.32240 of 2018
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of February, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a consumer of electricity, challenges Ext.P9
order passed by the Kerala State Electricity Appellate Authority
dismissing the appeal preferred against the proceedings initiated
under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
2. Consequent to an inspection of the petitioner's premises
on 27.04.2018, a provisional assessment notice was issued alleging
that an unauthorised additional load (UAL) of 22kW was found to be
used with respect to two floors, both of which had separate
connections. The mahazar did not allege that the petitioner had
illegally extracted energy from the ground to the first floor, which
2026:KER:14810
was a separate premise with a separate connection.
3. The petitioner had objected to it by specifically contending
that the supply from the electric connection was used only for the
ground floor and not for the first floor. There is no proper answer
given to the said contention, either in the provisional assessment
or the final assessment order.
4. In the appeal, the petitioner had taken specific grounds
which read as follows;
"B. The connection under Consumer No.1146358024837 is confined to
the ground floor of the building occupied by the Appellant. Whereas
the inspection, provisional assessment and final assessment are
based upon the assumption that the above connection covers the
area under the ground floor and first floor. The details of the
equipments allegedly noted down which forms basis of the
assessment is therefore on the face of it erroneous and unacceptable.
C. The fact that the above consumer number pertains to electrical
connection extended to the ground floor of the building alone was
specifically pointed out in Annexure B objection. However the
assessment authority in its final assessment proceedings have
erroneously relied upon the mahazar allegedly acknowledgement by
one of the employees of the Appellant. As a matter of fact signature
of the employee of the Appellant was forcefully obtained in the above
2026:KER:14810
mahazar by the inspection team which acted in a routine and
mechanical manner. The above mahazar evidently do not reflect the
factual reality that the subject connection is confined to the ground
floor and therefore cannot be relied by the authority to come to a
conclusion that the subject connection is for the ground floor and
first floor.
D. The above manner in which assessment has been done by
calculating the load of electrical equipments in ground floor and the
first floor itself vitiate the proceedings since the above connection
only applies for ground floor. The finding neglecting to consider the
actual connected load inspite of specific plea to the said effect is
baseless especially considering the fact that the concerned authority
erred even in primarily understanding the area i.e. the ground floor
which is the only space covered by the subject connection."
4. Despite the above grounds raised and the Appellate
Authority noticing the same, the Appellate Authority found
favour with the argument of the respondent herein that the
inspection team had conducted a detailed checking of the
site and got convinced about the equipments/appliances
connected and used from the connection, and that other
connections are also present in the building handled by the
consumer and therefore he can re-arrange the load among
2026:KER:14810
these connections at his will. Despite finding that the
building is operated from the connections bearing consumer
Nos. 24837 and 24835, and in the absence of any allegation
that there was a misuse of electricity, the contention of the
petitioner was not considered with reference to the
applicable provisions. The Appellate Authority has not
considered the same in the correct perspective by noticing
the rival contentions.
5. In such circumstances, Ext.P9 order is set aside with
a direction to the Appellate Authority to re-hear Appeal
No.180 of 2018, specifically taking note of the grounds stated
in the appeal. Fresh orders, as directed above, shall be
passed within three months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed in the appeal as
directed above, no further payment shall be demanded
pursuant to the assessment orders impugned before the
Appellate Authority.
2026:KER:14810
The writ petition is allowed as above.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
SSK/18/02
2026:KER:14810
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 32240 OF 2018
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R1 (a) True copy of the site mahazar dated
27.04.2018
Exhibit R1(b) True copy of the provisional assessment
order issued by the Assistant Executive
Engineer of Electrical Sub
Division,Kottayam dated 02.05.2018
Exhibit R1(c) True copy of the letter dated
17.05.2018
Exhibit R1(d) True copy of the Final Assessment bill
dated 20.06.2018
Exhibit R1(e) True copy of the application dated
02.07.2018 by the consumer
Exhibit R1(f) True copy of the application dated
04.07.2018 by the consumer
Exhibit R1(g) True copy of the order of the Appellate
Authority dated 14.09.2018
Exhibit R1(h) True copy of the notice issued by the
Assistant Engineer, Electrical section
Kottayam East.
Exhibit R1(i) True copy of the extracts of the order
of the Regulatory Commission.
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 27.7.2018
FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6 THE TRANSLATION COPY OF EXHIBIT P5 SITE
MAHAZAR DATED 21.4.2018 PREPARED BY MR.
MANESH K.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SITE MAHAZAR DATED
21.4.2018 PREPARED BY MR.MANESH K.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL NO.180/2018
FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY APPELLATE
AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ASSESSMENT
ORDER NO.DB 42/UAL/24837/KTM E/2018-
19/17 DATED 20.6.2018
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION TO THE
EXHIBIT P1 PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT DATED
17.5.2018 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO
THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL
2026:KER:14810
ASSESSMENT NOTICE DATED 2.5.2018 VIDE
NOTICE NO.DB42/PB/UAL/KTM E/24837/2018-
19/10 FOR CONSUMER NUMBERS
1146358024837 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
