E JOHN THOMAS Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the owner of a two storied commercial building. With a view to start a business in one room on the ground floor of the said building bearing door No.40/8815(1) of Cochin Corporation, he applied for electricity connection by submitting Ext.P1 application. THE Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Section, Central, Kerala State Electricity Board, Ernakulam, the officer having jurisdiction over the area, thereupon sent Ext.P3 letter dated 10.12.2010 informing the petitioner that electricity connection can be given only after installation of a separate transformer and that he will have to meet the expenses for the transformer and associated works. Such a stand was taken relying on sub-clause (5) of paragraph 5 of the Kerala State Electricity Board Terms and Conditions of Supply, 2005. THE said letter was followed by Ext.P2 letter dated 22.12.2010 wherein the petitioner was asked to intimate his willingness to meet the expenses for installing the transformer. THE petitioner thereupon submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 4.1.2011 wherein he interalia contended that the stipulation that the consumer should meet the expenses for the transformer does not apply to him for the reason that the building to which connection is sought is not a Multistoried (High rise) Building as his building has a height of only 7.25 meters. He also raised other contentions. This writ petition was thereafter filed on 21.2.2011 challenging Exts.P2 and P3 and seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) THE main contention raised by the petitioner is that as the height of the building to which connection is sought is only 7.25 meters, it is not a Multistoried (High rise) Building as defined in the Kerala Electricity Supply Code, 2005 and the Kerala State Electricity Board Terms and Conditions of Supply, 2005, and therefore, the Board cannot insist that the consumer should pay for a dedicated transformer and meet the expenses for installing the same.

(3.) AS stated earlier, sections 50 and 181 of the Act empower the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission to frame the Supply Code. The provisions of the Supply Code can therefore be amended only by the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission. Even assuming for the sake of arguments that the Board can frame and issue the Conditions of Supply, the stipulations therein cannot militate against the Supply Code framed and issued by the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission. Any stipulation in the Conditions of Supply will have to be in tune with the Supply Code. Therefore, even assuming that the Conditions of Supply can be amended by the Board by stipulating as done in Ext.R2(a) that even in the case of buildings having a height of less than 15 meters, the total load of individual consumers can be clubbed together and a transformer of adequate capacity can be required to be installed, if the total load exceeds 50 KVA, the amendment cannot operate in view of the absence of any such stipulation in that regard in the Supply Code. The Supply Code can be amended only by the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission. That has admittedly not been done. I accordingly hold that the Board is not entitled to insist that though the petitioner's building does not satisfy the definition of the term "Multi- storied (High rise) Building", he should pay for a dedicated transformer. The petitioner is, in my opinion, entitled to have the electricity connection without being compelled to pay for a dedicated transformer. I accordingly allow the writ petition, quash Exts.P2 and P3 and direct the respondents to give electricity connection to the petitioner's building, without insisting on the petitioner paying for a dedicated transformer. The electricity connection shall be given within a period of one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the second respondent. If for that purpose, a transformer is required to be installed, the Board shall do so at its expense.