Kerala High Court
Rahmaniyya Arabic College Committee vs Representedstate Electricity Board on 30 October, 2014
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/8TH KARTHIKA, 1936
WP(C).No.34635 of 2009 (Y)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
-----------
RAHMANIYYA ARABIC COLLEGE COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY C.H.KUNJABDULLA MUSALIYAR,
S/O. LATE C.H. KUNHAMMAD MUSALIYAR,
P.O. KATAMERI, VILLIAPPALLY, VATAKARA,
KOZHIKODE - 673 542.
BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS
RESPONDENTS :
-------------
1.REPRESENTEDSTATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
THE KERALA
BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2.VYDHYUTHIBAVANAM,(DISTRIBUTION NORTH),
THE CHIEF ENGINEER
K.S.E.B, KOZHIKODE -32.
3.KERALA
THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE,
VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE.
4.AYANCHERRY, ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION,
THE ASSISTANT
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
5.THAANATH
STATE ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN,
BUILDING, CLUB JUNCTION, POOKKATTUPADY ROAD,
EDAPPALLY TOLL, KOCHI - 682 024.
R1-4 BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAJAN,SC,K.S.E.B.
BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
30-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.34635 of 2009 (Y)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-
----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED
UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT DTD.17/4/1979.
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION ISSUED BY
THE BOARD OF CONTROL FOR ORPHANAGES AND OTHER
CHARITABLE HOMES TO THE PETITIONER SOCIETY.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.21/4/88 ISSUED BY
THE INCOME TAX OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER SOCIETY.
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS)49/2003/SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM DT.2-9-03 ALONG WITH A
COVERING LETTER DTD.20/10/03 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
SOCIETY.
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O.(Rt)
No.1387/1997/G.Edn. DTD.29/4/1997.
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER DTD.4/10/2002.
EXHIBIT P7 : A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD.27/2/2007 ISSUED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DTD.27/2/2007 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER SOCIETY IN RESPECT OF CONSUMER No.4332.
EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.29/7/2008.
EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED REPRESENTATION
DTD.14/8/2008 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD 20/8/2008 IN W.P.(C)
No.25084/2008.
EXHIBIT P12 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD.25/8/2008 ISSUED BY THE
K.S.E.B.
EXHIBIT P13 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.11/11/2009 ISSUED BY THE
STATE ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN.
EXHIBIT P14 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD.3/2/2009 ISSUED BY THE
INCOME TAX OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P15 : TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DTD.25/11/2009 TOGETHER WITH THE
COVERING LETTER ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER TO THE
PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL.
True copy
P.A to Judge
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.34635 of 2009
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of October, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, which is running various institutions, namely, RAC Destitute Study Centre. RAC Destitute Study Centre is having an electricity connection with Consumer No.4332 under the KSEB Electrical Section, Ayanchery. With effect from 1/12/2007, the petitioner's institution has been classified under LT-VIIA tariff from LT-VIA tariff and the petitioner was issued with Exts.P7 to 9 and P15. The petitioner has approached this Court in this Writ Petition seeking various reliefs including a writ of certiorari to quash Exts.P7 to P9, P13 and P15 under LT-VIIA tariff.
2. By order dated 11/12/2009, this Court granted an interim order staying operation of all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P13 and P15.
3. The question involved in this Writ Petition is as to whether private self-financing educational institutions are W.P.(C).No.34635 of 2009 2 liable to be charged under LT-VIIA tariff, in distinction with private aided educational institutions, which are charged under LT-VIA tariff. The issue stands settled in favour of the petitioner, as per a Division Bench decision of this Court in Bro. Joseph Antony Vs. K.S.E.B (2009 (3) KLT 1022). It is brought to my notice that, the above decision is under challenge before the Apex Court in various Special Leave Petitions filed by the KSEB, and the Apex Court had stayed operation of the said judgment. However, unless the legal position is reversed, this Court is bound to follow the decision in Bro. Joseph Antony's case (supra), in view of the principle laid down by this Court in Abdu Rehiman Vs. District Collector, Malappuram (2009 (4) KLT 485).
4. The further challenge in this Writ Petition is against Exts.P7 to 9, P13 and P15 demand notices whereby the petitioner was requested to make payment of arrears of electricity charges at enhanced rate, i.e., under LT-VIIA tariff. The question regarding liability of the petitioner for payment at enhanced rate will depend upon outcome of the decision of W.P.(C).No.34635 of 2009 3 the Apex Court. In view of the stay granted by the Apex Court, I am not inclined to restrain the respondent Board from charging the petitioner under the enhanced tariff. This is because of the fact that, if ultimately the Apex Court upholds the change of tariff, the respondent Board will be put to prejudice. On the other hand, the petitioner can seek refund/adjustment if the decision is ultimately in favour of the consumers. But it is only just and proper to restrain the respondent Board from recovering the arrears on the basis of the enhanced tariff, till the matter is ultimately decided by the Apex Court.
5. Therefore this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to keep in abeyance recovery of arrears demanded under Exts.P7 to P9, P13 and P15 notices till ultimate decision is rendered by the Apex Court in the SLPs referred above. It is made clear that the respondents are free to charge the petitioner under LT VIIA tariff for continued consumption of energy. It is made clear that payments made under the enhanced tariff will be liable to be refunded/adjusted W.P.(C).No.34635 of 2009 4 in case the Apex Court upholds the judgment in Bro. Joseph Antony's case (supra). It is also made clear that the respondents will be entitled to recover the arrears, if the change of tariff is ultimately upheld by the Apex Court.
This Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No order as to costs.
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE skj