PREMKUMAR M. S. Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner challenges Exts. P3 and P4. A direction is sought to forthwith reconnect supply of electricity to the petitioner's residence having consumer No. 10485.

(2.) Petitioner is a LT domestic consumer. An inspection took place on 24/11/2008 resulting in Ext. P1 mahazar being prepared. The purport of Ext. P1 mahazar is that there is theft. It is the case of the petitioner that he is orally informed that if he pays an amount of Rs.76,000/- at the rate of Rs.4000/- per kilo watt in terms of S.152(1) of the Electricity Act, he could compound the offence. It is the case of the petitioner that in a threatening manner the Board compelled the petitioner to accept the offer of settlement and he paid Rs.76,000/- assuming that this will give a quietus to the issue. It is stated that the facts as stated would reveal that there is no question of any theft and that any domestic consumer faced with the onslaught of the officers of the Board barging into the residence and threatening untoward consequences including prosecution and arrest, the petitioner was compelled to remit the amount of Rs.76,000/-. Ext. P2 is a copy of the receipt. Ext. P3 is the proceedings of the Executive Engineer dated 25/11/2008, by which it is ordered that the offences have been compounded and no other proceedings shall be initiated against the consumer in any Criminal Court. It is his case that he is not aware of the technicalities of the matter. It is stated however that petitioner came to be served with Ext. P4 reassessment bill dated 25/11/2008 calling upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,37,495/- by way of provisional assessment for theft of electrical energy. Ext. P5 series are copies of previous bills from October, 2006 onwards.

(3.) I heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Sri. P. Ravindran and the learned Standing Counsel Sri. P. P. Thajudeen.