IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.P.No.46183/2019 (GM – KEB) BETWEEN :
Mr. CHINMAYA G.N., S/O G.R.NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O NO.154/10, DORESANIPALYA BILEKALALLI VILLAGE, AREKERE BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU-560078 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI SHRIDHAR PRABHU, ADV.) AND :
1 . THE ELECTRICITY OMBUDSMAN NO.16, C-1, MILLERS TANK BUND ROAD, BEHIND JAIN HOSPITAL, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560052 2 . THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEEER (ELECTRICAL) BANGALORE ELETRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, S-12 SUB DIVISION, GOWRAVANAGAR, J.P.NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560078 3 . BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISION OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT K.R.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 4 . CONSUMER GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL FORUM OF BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BESCOM WEST CIRCLE OFFICE, 39, SIDDHAIAH PURANIK ROAD BASAVESHWAR NAGAR, BENGALURU-560079 (REP BY ITS CHAIRPERSON) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.V.DEVARAJU, ADV. FOR R-2 & R-3; NOTICE TO R-1 & R-4 ARE DISPENSED WITH.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 7TH AUGUST, 2019 PASSED BY THE R-1 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23RD MAY, 2019 PASSED BY THE R-4 (ANNEXURE-B).
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioner has challenged the order dated 7.8.2019 in case No.OMB/B/G-343/2019 as well as the order dated 23.5.2019 passed by the respondent No.4.
2. The petitioner had availed the power supply as a registered consumer initially under HT-2 B category. It is contended that one of the tenants of the petitioner was in need of additional power. The petitioner sought for an additional load of 200 KVA by making an application. The 2nd respondent has issued the Provisional Assessment Order as per clause 29.03 (supplementary claims) of the KERC E&SD Code, 2004 and a demand was made pursuant to the said assessment order.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that without the petitioner’s knowledge and authorization, the tenant in the premises i.e., Adyar Anand Bhavan filed objections to the Provisional Assessment Order and finally assessment order being passed, the tenant has challenged the same before the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) of BESCOM under Section 42(4) of the Electricity Act, 2003. On the order of dismissal passed by the 4th respondent, the tenant has challenged the same unsuccessfully before the OMBUDSMAN. The petitioner was oblivious of all these aspects. The same has come to the knowledge of the petitioner only at the time of the official respondents trying to disconnect the power supply to the premises of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being the registered consumer was to be provided with an opportunity of hearing. The proceedings initiated by the tenant is not binding on him. It is the fervent plea that the petitioner may be provided with an opportunity to appear before the Assessing Officer and defend his case.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents justifying the order impugned submitted that any order made subsequent to the proceedings initiated by the tenant of the registered consumer more particularly in the name of the registered consumer, cannot be faulted with.
5. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the justice would be sub-served in setting aside the orders impugned and permitting the petitioner to appear before the Assessing Officer respondent No.2 subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the quantum of amount directed to be paid by the petitioner in terms of the order of the OMBUDSMAN but in five installments.
Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of above.
Sd/- JUDGE Dvr: