The facts involved in the above writ petition would disclose that the petitioner is having a residential building and commercial establishments. He has 5 connections which according to him is connected from an electric post CKU 3/1. These connections have been disconnected on account of the fact that there was some dispute regarding the obligation to shift another post CKU3/2, which according to the Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as “the KSEB”) was in a dangerous condition as it was manipulated by the petitioner. The petitioner had approached the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) by filing O.P.No.1165/2014 which came to be disposed of by an order dated 17.5.2014 produced as Ext.P3. In Ext.P3 the CGRF found that as per the existing norms the petitioner should agree with Clause 95 of the Supply Code, 2014. Further it is observed that the petitioner is given supply from the post and the line was installed 50 years ago. The said line being in a dangerous situation, its supply had to be disconnected and it is only just and proper for the licensee to present the matter before the Additional District Magistrate. The matter was taken up before the Additional District Magistrate who had agreed with the directions issued by the CGRF as well. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even if the post CKU 3/2 is in a dangerous condition, as far the connections are concerned it is from CKU 3/1 and therefore there is no reason to disconnect the electricity to the petitioner's premises.
2. Counter affidavit is filed by the KSEB inter alia stating that the three phase overhead service line is drawn from HT/LT post CKU 3 situated on the left side of Nedumangad - Ponmudi road from which a tapping, crossing the road, is taken to post CKU 3/1 erected on the right side of Nedumangad - Ponmudi road and four weather proof service connections all in the name of the petitioner are given for commercial purpose from the above post to the building constructed in front of the petitioner's house and within his property facing the road. However the three phase OH line is further drawn to post CKU 3/2 situated in the petitioner's property and near to the entrance of petitioner's house and service connection bearing Consumer No.2654 is effected to the petitioner from this post. The OH line is further drawn and terminated at post CKU 3/3 erected at south end of the property from which weather proof service connection is effected to Smt.Jaseentha as per Consumer No.1792 for agricultural purpose. It is further stated that the petitioner purposefully damaged the post CKU 3/2. If the said post falls down the remaining poles also will fall down and it will cause huge loss to life and property of public and to the petitioner himself. It is on account of the illegal act of the petitioner that appropriate steps have been taken to change the entire line and to avoid any further damage, the connection has been dismantled.
3. I.A.No.13590/2014 has been filed by Smt.Jaseentha seeking impleadment in the case. According to her, the power has been dismantled on account of the attitude shown by the petitioner.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.
5. After hearing the parties at length, there is no dispute about the fact that CKU 3/2 line has to be dismantled and has to be replaced by a new post to avoid any further damage to the entire line. According to the KSEB, only this particular post has to be changed and necessary realignment will have to be done in order to give power connection to the petitioner and Smt. Jaseentha.
6. The dispute is only with reference to the liability to pay the charges for such replacement. According to the KSEB the shifting charges has to be met by the petitioner as per Regulation 95 of the Supply Code. Regulation 95 (4) reads as under:
“(4) Application for shifting an electric line or electrical plant shall be granted only if:
(a) The proposed shifting is technically feasible and;
(b) The owner of the land or his successor in interest gives consent in writing to shift the electric line or electrical plant or any other portion of his land or to any other land owned by him or any alternate right of way along any public pathway available for shifting the electric line or the electric plant and;
© The applicant remits the labour charges required for shifting the electrical line or electrical plant.”
7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner if at all any payment has to be made the petitioner is liable to pay the labour charges only.
8. The above aspect has been disputed by the learned standing counsel appearing for the KSEB who submits that the entire shifting charges has to be paid by the petitioner. Other than the above dispute I do not think that the parties have any other dispute. The requirement of the petitioner and the additional 5th respondent is to urgently get back the electricity connection to their premises. Having regard to the aforesaid factual dispute, this writ petition is disposed of as under:
i) The KSEB shall take all necessary steps to replace CKU 3/2 and continue supply of electricity to the petitioner and additional 5th respondent within a period of four days from today.
ii) The KSEB is permitted to provide a bill to the petitioner showing the expenses incurred under Regulation 95 of the Supply Code.
iii) If the petitioner has any dispute regarding the liability to pay the said bill amount, the same shall be deferred for a period of 15 days in order to enable the petitioner to challenge the same before the appropriate authority.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE
vpv