Rahul George. Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

[mr. justice b.s. patil, j.] this mfa is filed u/s 173(1) of mv act. against the judgment and award dated: 29/1 1/2006 passed in mvc no. 4382/2004 on the file of the xi additional judge. court of small causes. member. mact, metropolitan area. bangalore. (scch-12), partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation with 12% interest......the respondent to proceed with the further steps including by way of disconnection. 2. the learned standing counsel for the board submits that the facts and figures in ext.p2 mahazar are very much on the basis of the actual position involved. it was subsequent to ext.p2, that ext.p3 intimation was given explaining the sequence of events; which in turn was followed by ext.p1 bill demanding the due amount, which is stated as not assailable under any circumstance. the learned standing counsel also submits that the said bill has been issued, invoking the provision under regulation 24 (5) of the kerala electricity supply code 2005; against which no appeal will lie under section 127 of the electricity act and that the idea and understanding of the petitioner in this regard is quite wrong and misconceived. the learned standing counsel further submits that, if the petitioner is aggrieved in any manner, in respect of the proceedings under regulation 24 (5), the remedy is to approach the consumer grievance redressal forum and that, if the petitioner approaches the said forum, the matter will definitely be caused to be looked into. 3. in the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner.....

Judgment:

1. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P1 to P3 proceedings issued by the respondent Board whereby a liability of Rs.1,14,240/- has been mulcted on the shoulders of the petitioner in respect of the electricity charges payable, because of the deficit assessment made by the Board. The case of the petitioner is that there is absolutely no rationale in issuing the said proceedings and that the petitioner is not liable to satisfy the same under any circumstance. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has already filed Ext.P4 appeal before the second respondent under Section 127 of the Electricity Act and that it is not fair or proper for the respondent to proceed with the further steps including by way of disconnection.

2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Board submits that the facts and figures in Ext.P2 mahazar are very much on the basis of the actual position involved. It was subsequent to Ext.P2, that Ext.P3 intimation was given explaining the sequence of events; which in turn was followed by Ext.P1 Bill demanding the due amount, which is stated as not assailable under any circumstance. The learned Standing Counsel also submits that the said Bill has been issued, invoking the provision under Regulation 24 (5) of the Kerala Electricity Supply Code 2005; against which no appeal will lie under Section 127 of the Electricity Act and that the idea and understanding of the petitioner in this regard is quite wrong and misconceived. The learned Standing Counsel further submits that, if the petitioner is aggrieved in any manner, in respect of the proceedings under Regulation 24 (5), the remedy is to approach the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and that, if the petitioner approaches the said Forum, the matter will definitely be caused to be looked into.

3. In the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to pursue his remedy by approaching the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum, by filing the necessary proceedings as prescribed. It is also made clear that if the petitioner approaches the Forum as above, by filing necessary proceedings and also with an I.A. for stay within a period of two weeks, the I.A. shall be considered and finalised by the authority concerned in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of submission of the proceedings. So as to enable the petitioner to approach the Forum as above, all coercive proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 to P3 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks.