RUPESH RAVINDRAN Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Exts.P1 and P2 Gazette notifications dated 25.09.2014 and 30.09.2014, revising the tariff of the Kerala Water Authority in respect of supply of water to various categories of consumers. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

(2.) Petitioner's mother-in-law is a consumer under the Kerala Water Authority. The case projected by the petitioner is that, even though Exts.P1 and P2 notifications were issued on 25.09.2014 and 30.09.2014 respectively, they were not gazetted and without publication of the notification in the Gazette, no legal recognition can be given to the same. According to the petitioner, the said notifications were published in the Gazette only during the year 2017, and therefore, no retrospective levy of tariff can be imposed on the petitioner's mother-in-law.

(3.) Petitioner had approached this Court earlier in W.P. (C) No.33566 of 2016. In my considered opinion, the very same question was raised by the petitioner in the said writ petition, wherein, this Court held that the notification issued by the State Government dated 25.09.2014 establishes that water tariff was revised on and with effect from 01.10.2014. Therefore, on a reading of the said notification, it is unequivocally clear that, orders were passed by the Government permitting the Water Authority to change the water tariff on and with effect from 01.10.2014. Since the Government Orders are published in the Gazette, it cannot be said that the petitioner or the public were not aware of the revised water tariff. It was also held that, 2nd respondent Water Authority took some time to implement the revised tariff against the consumers, and merely because there is delay on the part of the Water Authority to implement the revised tariff, it cannot be said that the tariff is given retrospective effect, since the same has come into force on and with effect from 01.10.2014.