ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

1. These writ appeals are filed by the respondents in W.P(C).25042/11 and connected cases, which were disposed of by a common judgment rendered on 14.11.2012.

2. The Chief Electrical Inspector issued two circulars, on 18.8.2011 and on 19.8.2011. These circulars are almost identically worded and are addressed to the Deputy Chief Electrical Inspectors, Electrical Inspectors, Technical officers in the office of the Chief Electrical Inspector and to the president of ‘A class Electrical Contractors’ Association. The relevant part of these circulars reads thus:

“The generating sets should not be allowed to be installed above ground floor or below first basement level of building. There shall be provision of separate direct escape and entry into these areas from outside in case of fire. All officers should be intimated this to all contractors/clients who have already been got scheme approval from our department and to relocate the generator sets in the ground floor itself”.

3. In the Writ Petitions that were filed, the circulars were challenged mainly on the ground that the Chief Electrical Inspector did not have the jurisdiction to issue the circulars. By the impugned judgment, the learned single Judge disposed of the Writ Petitions, holding thus:

“On the basis of the discussions hereinabove contained, conclusions and reliefs can be summed up as follows:-

(1) Circular No.B4.15044/2011/CEI dated 18.8.2011 of the Chief Electrical Inspector, Government of Kerala is hereby quashed on the ground that there is no decision taken or consent obtained from the Central Electricity Authority to follow the said code of practice contained in clause 4.2.1(m) of Section 2 in Part 8 of the Building Code as part of the Electricity Authority Regulations.

(2) It is held that the Chief Electrical Inspector and the Electrical Inspectors are competent authorities duly authorized to conduct inspections and to scrutinize specifications and safety measures with respect to installation of Generators and to approve scheme for such installations.

(3) The Chief Electrical Inspector will be at liberty to insist upon compliance of the code of practice enumerated in clause 4.2.1 of section 2 in part 8 of the Building Code, on a prospective basis, for the purpose of approval of schemes for installation of Generators, after seeking consent or opinion from the Central Electricity Authority and on such authority consenting to follow such code of practice as part of the Electricity Authority Regulations.

(4) Till any such consent or decision is obtained from the Central Electricity Authority and till such decision is notified through any appropriate circular, the specifications/conditions stipulated in the circular of the Chief Electrical Inspector, which is quashed hereinabove, cannot be insisted for approval of schemes and for permitting installation and connectivity of Generators.”

4. The reasoning of the learned single Judge is reflected in paragraph 14 of the judgment, which reads thus:

“14. It is to be noted that there is no materials available to show that, before issuing the impugned circular the Chief Electrical Inspector had made any consultation or sought opinion from the Central Electricity Authority. Regulation 12(2) of the Electricity Authority Regulations provides that any code of practice in the Electrical Code or Bureau of Indian Standards “may be followed to carry out the purpose of this regulation” (emphasis supplied). It indicates that any code of practice in the Electrical Code or Building Code will not automatically become part of the Electricity Authority Regulations, unless it is decided to be followed. Whether any code of practice need be followed as a regulation or not is a matter which need be decided by the competent authority. The word ‘may’ used in regulation 12(2) is a clear indication of such a discretion. Definitely, it should be left to the decision of the authority who is competent to formulate the Regulations. There