The Kerala High Court while considering a writ petition of two KESB employees impugning the penal proceeding against them for delay in providing electricity connection, found no merit in the petition and remarked “Water and electricity are integral part of right to life within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Section 43 of the Electricity Act provides that there is a statutory duty on the distribution licensee to provide electric connection to the applicants within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply”
Factual Background
The 3rd respondent, one P. Sainuddeen, applied for electric connection to his house which was delayed due to which he moved to the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and Electricity Ombudsman) Regulations, 2005 under the Electricity Act, 2003 seeking timely connection to his house. The forum directed the petitioners to draw a plan out an estimate to provide electricity connection to the aggrieved party’s house within 21 days and collect estimate amount of such connection from the 3rd respondent himself. The petitioners even after the expiry of the time period stipulated by the forum failed to provide electricity connection to the 3rd respondent’s house after which proceedings were initiated against them by the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission. The petitioners pleaded that they did not receive consent of the owner of the property adjacent to the 3rd respondent’s house from where the wire was supposed to go through due to which they delayed in providing the electricity connection as per the forum’s order. The Regulatory Commission found no merit in the petitioners’ excuses and held that there has been willful non-compliance of the CGRF’s order and Electricity Act, 2003 and imposed penalty of Rs.50,000 and Rs.25,000 to petitioner no. 1 and 2 respectively. The commission also noted that there had been multiple technical alternatives to shift the electric line and providing connection to the 3rd respondent. Aggrieved by the Commission’s actions the petitioners moved to the court pleading that they were wrongfully penalized since they did not have any other alternative as per the CGRF’s order to provide the electricity connection.
The Court’s Findings
The single judge bench of Justice Murali Purushothaman noted that it was the statutory duty of the state electricity board to provide electricity connection to the 3rd respondent within one month. The court further observed that the Regulatory Commission had correctly discerned that the petitioners had willfully disobeyed CGRF’s orders and failed to take other alternatives nad remarked “This Court also agrees with the view of the Regulatory Commission that when easier technical alternatives for the shifting of the electric line like providing strut instead of stay, providing underground cable or Aerial Bunch Conductor etc are available, such alternatives are to be resorted to.” Thus the court declared that the petitioners had been rightly penalized for their non-compliance as per the provisions of the Electricity Act,2003.
The Court took notice of the delay and commented “To light up a tiny bulb in his tiny house Sainuddeen had to walk from pole to pole. An order of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) in his favour could not dispel the darkness at his home” the Court further remarked “electricity is a basic amenity in life. Water and electricity are integral part of right to life within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Section 43 of the Electricity Act provides that there is a statutory duty on the distribution licensee to provide electric connection to the applicants within one month after receipt of the application requiring such supply”
Making the above observations the Court decided not to interfere with the penal action of the Regulatory Commission and dismissed the petition.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
