The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
“a) Call for the entire records leading upto Ext.P3 and quash the same, by issuing a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in so far as it directs the petitioner to remit Rs.2,08,838/- as interest charged on the amount as per reassessment bill dt.02- 11-2006.
b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the petitioner is not liable to pay any interest charged on the amount as per reassessment bill dated 02-11-2006 as it is against Ext.P1.”
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the challenge raised by the petitioner by way of appeal against the order passed by the 2nd respondent was finalised as per Ext.P1 order dated 27.12.2013, as per which the petitioner was required to satisfy the balance amount of `1,33,870/-. The entire amount was permitted to be cleared by way of 'four' equal monthly instalments as per Ext.P2 judgment dated 26.09.2014 in WP(C) No. 4919 of 2014. In spite of the willingness offered by the petitioner to liquidate the liability accordingly, the amount tendered by the petitioner was not accepted by the respondents stating that much higher amount was to be cleared. Later, the petitioner was served with Ext.P3 notice dated 13.11.2014 stating that the petitioner had to satisfy a sum of `1,33,870/- towards principal amount and another sum of `2,08,838 towards interest, thus total sum of `3,42,708/-. This made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ petition stating that the petitioner is not supposed to pay anything other than the principal amount of `1,33,870/-.
3. The version of the petitioner is sought to be rebutted by the learned standing counsel pointing out that, the liability to satisfy interest on the principal amount is a natural consequence and that, while passing Ext.P2 judgment, this Court specifically directed the petitioner to satisfy the 'entire liability' by way of 'four' equal monthly instalments, as specified in paragraph 7 of the said judgment. This naturally includes interest as well and hence, there is no merit or bonafides in the writ petition, submits the learned standing counsel.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that, even going by Ext.P1 order passed by the Deputy Chief Engineer (Appellate Authority), interest for belated payment need not be levied for appeal pending period, whereas Ext.P3 takes in the said period as well.
5. The factual position was ascertained by the learned standing counsel, who submits that some inadvertent mistake has crept in while issuing Ext.P3 and that the total figure after excluding the appeal period (from 25.06.213 - the date of appeal, till 27.12.2013 - the date of Ext.P1 order) is to be worked out. On re-working the figures, the total amount will only be `3,30,660/-.
6. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has now been served with a copy of the order/proceeding bearing No. B.B./Puthur/KSEB- CTS/2014-15 dated 18.11.2014 issued by the 2nd respondent that 'One Time Settlement Scheme' is available with reduced rate of interest and that the petitioner is eligible for satisfying the due amount by way of 'six' equal monthly instalments, but for the principal amount which has to be satisfied as a 'One Time payment'. The Scheme is valid till 31.12.2014 and that the petitioner wants to avail such benefit.
7. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to satisfy the principal amount of `1,33,870/- under the 'Scheme', to be effected on or before 31.12.2014 and the balance `1,96,790/- (`3,30,660 - `1,33,870) shall be cleared by way of 'six' equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 20th of January 2015 followed by similar instalments shall be effected on or before the 20th of the succeeding months. Subject to this, the electric supply shall not be disconnected, for the time being. It is made clear that, if any single default is committed with regard to the satisfaction of the 'liability' as above, it will be open for the respondent to proceed with further steps, including for realization of the entire amount in lump, by pursuing such steps from the stage where it stands now.
The writ petition is disposed of.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE Pn