VELAYUDHAN K V Vs. ASSISTANT ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a consumer of electrical energy. THE premises to which the electricity connection has been given was inspected on 23.3.2009 by the Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Changaramkulam. THE inspection revealed theft of energy. THE petitioner thereupon filed an application under section 152 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for compounding the offence and the offence was allowed to be compounded on payment of `.36,000/-, which the petitioner remitted on 26.3.2009. Consequent on the detection of unauthorised extraction of energy Ext.P1 provisional notice demanding payment of the sum of `.2,02,319/- was issued to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Chief Engineer, Electrical Circle, Tirur. By Ext.P3 order passed on 23.12.2009 the appellate authority held that though the petitioner had extracted energy unauthorisedly the levy of energy charges as claimed in Ext.P1 is not sustainable. THE appellate authority accordingly directed Ext.P1 invoice to be revised in the manner indicated in Ext.P3. THE first respondent thereupon issued Ext.P4 invoice demanding payment of the sum of `.47,597/-. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner filed Ext.P5 appeal before the appellate authority. By Ext.P6 order passed on 16.9.2010 the said appeal was rejected on the ground that as the appellate authority has already exercised the appellate jurisdiction and directed revision of Ext.P1 invoice an appeal would not lie from Ext.P4. Ext.P6 is under challenge in this writ petition. THE main contention raised by the petitioner is that before Ext.P6 order was passed he was not put on notice or heard and that in view of Ext.P3 order passed by the appellate authority the first respondent was bound to revise Ext.P1 invoice in the manner indicated in Ext.P3 and that having not been done, Ext.P4 invoice is liable to be varied.

(2.) SRI.P.P.Thajudeen, learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board, submitted on instructions that the first respondent will revise Ext.P1 invoice in the light of the directions issued in Ext.P3 appellate order and issue a revised bill to the petitioner.