JENIN MON V Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD; ASSISTANT ENGINEER; ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER; EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Correctness of the verdicts passed by the learned Single Judge (separate judgments) on different dates, in the concerned writ petitions, relegating the appellants/writ petitioners to pursue statutory remedy by way of appeal under Section 127 of the Electricity Act, 2003 ( 'Act' for short) in respect of the assessment finalised under Section 126, is the subject matter of challenge in all these appeals.

(2.) The facts and circumstances are almost similar and so also is the position with regard to the consequences resulted. For convenience of reference, the parties and proceedings are referred to, as given in W.A.No.1436 of 2016, except where it is dealt with separately.

(3.) The petitioners availed electricity connection from the respondent Board under 'LT IVA category' (Industrial tariff) with a sanctioned load of less than 100 KW. On getting information as to the unauthoised use of electrical energy in the premises, a surprise inspection was conducted by the APTS (Anti Power Theft Squad) on 22.04.2016, when it was brought to light that the connected load in the premises was much higher than the sanctioned load and as such, there was high instances of 'unauthorised use' of electricity, which came within the purview of Section 126 of the Act. Ext.P1 Mahazar was prepared on the spot, referring to the incriminating circumstances and the instance of misuse/unauthorised use. It was accordingly, that Ext.P2 provisional assessment bill was issued to the consumer, followed by Ext.P3 demand notice. The appellant/consumer submitted Ext.P4 statement of objections. After considering the same, Ext.P5 final assessment order came to be passed by the second respondent, whereby a penalty of two times the charges for the excess quantity of the electricity consumed was mulcted upon the consumer/appellant.