Ext. P2 notice issued under section 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act against the petitioner for realisation of arrears of Electricity Charges due to KSEB is under challenge in this writ petition. The electric connection was provided under respondents 2 and 3 in the name of the petitioner in his capacity as Secretary of the 4th respondent Society, on 3.2.2004, under LT IV tariff. The service connection was dismantled on 20.11.2006. Since the consumer had defaulted payment of the charges due, the impugned revenue recovery proceedings was initiated. The arrears due is to the tune of Rs.75,657/-. 2. The 4th respondent Society was formed for implementation of a drinking water project, to which 61 families in the locality are the beneficiaries. The electric connection was obtained for operation of a pump set. According to the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 had issued demand notice to all the beneficiaries to make payment of the amount in arrears. Ext.P1 is the copy of one of such demand notices issued. Grievance is that, on the basis of Ext.P2 notice the 1st respondent is now proceeding against personal properties of the petitioner.
3 . Contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not even executed the agreement for obtaining the electric connection, with the authorities of the KSEB. On the other hand it is alleged that, the 5th respondent, who is the Vice President of the Society, had impersonated the petitioner and executed the agreement with the Board. It is further stated that, with respect to the alleged impersonation and falsification of signature a criminal case was registered against the 5th respondent, which is pending trial before the Magistrate Court concerned. Further contention is to the effect that, even assuming that the connection stands in the name of the petitioner as Secretary, of the 4th respondent Society he cannot be held personally liable for payment of the arrears.
4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 it is mentioned that the connection in question was provided in the name of the petitioner as Secretary of the 4th respondent Society. Since the service connection is registered in the name of the petitioner he is liable to pay the arrears due to the Board. The 5th respondent had also filed counter affidavit denying the allegations of impersonation and falsification of signature.
5. It is evident from the records that the 4th respondent is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. Admittedly the connection was obtained for the purpose of implementation of the drinking water project. Copy of the agreement executed is produced as Ext.R2(a), which indicates that the petitioner had executed an agreement in the capacity as Secretary of the 4th respondent Society. In all the communications it is evident that notices are issued to the petitioner in the capacity as Secretary of the Society. The petitioner can be considered as the registered consumer only in his capacity as Secretary of the 4th respondent. Therefore question arises as to whether he is personally liable for the arrears. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Society has got assets, both movable and immovable, and that the authorities are not taking any steps against those assets. Incidentally the petitioner is also raising complaint that he is not liable because has not executed the agreement in question.
6. While considering the factual aspects enumerated above, this court is of the opinion that the question as to whether any personal liability can be fetched against the petitioner is a matter which need be adjudicated by any competent authority in the KSEB. Since the demand is issued at the instance of the 2nd respondent, this court is of the opinion that the 3rd respondent can be directed to examine the issue and to take appropriate decision.
7. The petitioner will submit a detailed objection against the demand before the 3rd respondent raising all the contentions, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of such objection, the 3rd respondent shall decide the question with respect to personal liability of the petitioner to pay the arrears . A decision in this regard shall be taken within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such objection. Till such time no proceedings shall be pursued against personal assets of the petitioner. However it is made clear that this will not stand in the way of the revenue recovery authorities proceeding against any of the assets belonging to the 4th respondent Society.
The writ petition is hereby disposed of on the above terms.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE pmn/