PANAVALLY VILLAGE SERVICE Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in the writ petition is the appellant in this writ appeal. The petitioner challenged Ext.P1 bill demanding the arrears of fixed electricity charges. It is not disputed that the petitioner was granted a connected load of 1 KW originally. From August, 1996 onwards the petitioner availed the facility of three phase connection and the connected load was increased to 6 KW. Without noticing the increase in the connected load the Board continued to collect fixed charges for 1 KW as against 6 KW. Ext.P1 bill was issued in these circumstances.

(2.) The contention in the writ petition is that Ext.P1 is violative of clause 42(d) of the Conditions of Supply of Electrical Energy. The Board contended that there is no question of applying clause 42 as there was no misuse of electrical energy by the writ petitioner. The learned Single Judge directed the Board to limit the recovery of actual fixed charges payable at the same rate at which it would have been payable.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant raised a contention that Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003 applies, and if so, arrears could be recovered only for a period of two years. He also submits that the assessment should have been under Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Board has not complied with Section 126 of the Electricity Act, 2003. No such contention was raised in the writ petition. No such contention is raised in the writ appeal as well.