Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

A.P.SIVADASAN, "KAUSTHUBHAM" versus THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


A.P.SIVADASAN, "KAUSTHUBHAM" v. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL - OP No. 1817 of 2003(N) [2006] RD-KL 2602 (6 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

OP No. 1817 of 2003(N)

1. A.P.SIVADASAN, "KAUSTHUBHAM",
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL
... Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), ALUVA.

3. UNNI @ GOPALAKRISHNAN,

For Petitioner :SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR

For Respondent :SRI.N.D.PREMACHANDRAN, SC, KSEB

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

Dated :06/12/2006

O R D E R

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

O.P.No.1817 of 2003 Dated 6th December, 2006.

J U D G M E N T

The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers :-

(i) "Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing Ext.P1 R.R. notice. (ii) Declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay the electricity charges in respect of consumption No.4642 under the first respondent. (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order commanding the first respondent to initiate appropriate action against the 3rd respondent for the realisation of the amount covered in Ext.P1 revenue recovery notice." There is no counter affidavit on behalf of the Electricity Board. The stand taken by the second respondent is that the recovery is at the instance of the Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Aluva. According to the petitioner, he is not liable to pay any energy charges. It will be open to the petitioner to bring his grievance to the notice of the Deputy Chief Engineer of the Electrical Circle, Ernakulam within two months from today. In the event of such an attempt being made, the said authority will consider the matter with notice to the petitioner and the third respondent and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance OP NO. 1817/03 2 with law, within another four months. The interim order passed by this Court in C.M.P.No.3217/03 will continue till such time. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH, J

O.P.No.1817 of 2003 (N)

J U D G M E N T

Dated 6th December, 2006.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.