U SHANMUGHAN Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the proprietor of a small scale industrial unit manufacturing power loom clothes. That unit has an LT industrial connection from the Kerala State Electricity Board for supply of electrical energy. The petitioner has been paying electricity charges regularly as per the invoices issued to him. On 26.5.2006, on an inspection conducted by a special squad of the Board, it was detected that two phases of the meter are not functioning. On the basis of the report of the squad, Ext.P1 additional bill for Rs. 12,880/- for the period of six months immediately prior to the detection of the defect, viz., from November 2005 to April 2006, was issued to the petitioner, which the petitioner paid, as evidenced by Exts.P2 and P3 receipts. But thereafter the petitioner was served with Ext.P4 additional bill on 21.3.2007 demanding an amount of Rs. 1,46,007/- stated to be the arrears of electricity charges for the period of 42 months from December, 2002 to May 2006, which period included the period covered by Ext.P1 bill as well, payment in respect of which period was already made by the petitioner. The petitioner was also threatened with disconnection by Ext.P6 notice. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs;

(2.) ALTHOUGH no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, the learned Standing Counsel for the Electricity Board opposes the prayers.

(3.) THERE is no allegation in this case that the petitioner tampered with the meter or that he also has contributed to the defect in the meter. After examining the provisions of the new Electricity Act, 2003 and the provisions of the Kerala State Electricity Supply Code, as well as the Kerala State Electricity Board Terms and Conditions of Supply, 2005, I have held in the decision in Siby K.Thomas v. Kerala State Electricity Board, 2012 (3) KLT 285, that when the defect in the meter is not attributable to the consumer, the Electricity Board can only recover electricity charges for 12 months prior to the date of inspection, that too, without realising any surcharge. I am satisfied that the ratio of that decision is squarely applicable to this case. Therefore, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition in terms of that decision.