Kerala State Electricity Board vs P.O. Devassykutty and Others

S. Siri Jagan, J.—The Kerala State Electricity Board and its officers have come up in appeal in this writ appeal challenging the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in O.P. No. 11562/2003. In that writ petition, the respondent herein (who is no more and his legal heirs have come on record to prosecute the writ appeal as additional respondents 2 to 7), challenged the arrear bill for consumption of electricity issued by the Board for a period of one year on the ground that the electricity meter installed in the premises of the respondent was defective for the said period. The learned Single Judge allowed the O.P. and quashed the demand on the ground that without following the procedure prescribed u/s 26(6) of the erstwhile Indian Electricity Act, which was applicable during the relevant period, the Electricity Board is not competent to raise arrear bill on the ground that for any period the meter was defective. According to the learned Single Judge, when Section 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act stipulates that the questions as to whether the meter is defective or not and what is the arrears of electricity charges payable have to be decided by the Electrical Inspector on a reference by either of the parties, in the absence of such a decision from the Electrical Inspector, the Electricity Board has no jurisdiction to demand arrears of electricity the ground that the meter was defective. The learned Single Judge relied on the decisions of this Court in Nirmala Metal Industries Vs. K.S.E.B., , George Joseph Vs. K.S.E.B. and Others as also the judgment in O.P. No. 4969/2001 to come to the above conclusion. The Electricity Board is challenging the said judgment in this writ appeal. According to the learned counsel for the Electricity Board, the Electricity Board is competent to recover arrears of electricity charges when the meter was detected to be faulty for any period in view of the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act itself.

The learned counsel for the respondent would contend that without following the procedure prescribed u/s 26(6) of the Indian Electricity Act, the Electricity Board has no jurisdiction to recover arrears of electricity charges on the ground that the meter is faulty.

We have considered the rival contentions in detail. The issue involved in this writ appeal is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court in Nirmala Metal Industries''s case (supra), George Joseph''s case (supra) and the judgment in O.P. No. 4969/200, in which this Court had reiterated the law on the subject to the effect that without reference to the Electrical Inspector, the Kerala State Electricity Board is not competent to recover arrears of electricity charges on the ground that the meter was faulty for any period. We are in respectful agreement with the decisions relied on by the learned Single Judge.

In the above circumstances, we do not find any merit in the writ appeal and accordingly the same is dismissed.