The only surviving dispute in this Writ Petition is as regards giving credit to the following payments made by the petitioner.
2. The petitioner relies on Ext.P12 proceedings of the Executive Engineer passed in appeal wherein it is inter alia held as follows:
"Surcharge shall not be levied during the appeal pending period before the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Kattappana".
The contention of the petitioner is that the amounts mentioned supra have been adjusted towards surcharge which could not have been levied in view of the appellate proceedings. 2 WP(C) No. 21841/2012
3. The Kerala State Electricity Board on the other hand maintains that no surcharge has been levied during the appeal pending period from January, 2006 to November, 2010. The amounts were infact adjusted towards surcharge for the earlier period which was permissible as per clause 36 (8) of the KSEB Terms and Conditions of Supply Code, 2005. The petitioner asserts that the appeal was pending from December, 2003 itself and that no surcharge could be levied from that day onwards. The dispute mainly pertains to the calculation of the amount giving credit to the payments already made.
4. I deem it fit to relegate the petitioner to the alternate remedy available under Regulation 56 (2) of the KSEB Terms and Conditions of Supply Code, 2005. The Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum can adjudicate these factual disputes after permitting the parties to substantiate their contentions. The petitioner can move the Forum within a period of one month from today which shall dispose of the complaint as expeditiously as possible. Needless to say that an appeal lies therefrom to the electricity Ombudsman as per Regulation 56 (2) itself. Any 3 WP(C) No. 21841/2012 proceedings for realisation of the amount from the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance till orders are passed by the Consumer Grievance Redresal Forum as directed above.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd