The appellate authority's flawed assessment was set aside due to lack of justification and reliance on a reversed judgment.

JUDGMENT

The Electricity Board challenges Ext.P6 order passed by the Kerala State Appellate Authority in Appeal No.98 of 2017 preferred by the 3^rd respondent consumer.

2. The 3^rd respondent is a consumer under the LT VII A commercial tariff with a sanctioned load of 10,000 watts. Consequent to the inspection by the Anti Power Theft Squad on 10.02.2017, a provisional assessment was made for Rs.1,51,448/- on 10.02.2017. The final assessment order revising the assessment to Rs.1,02,618/- was issued on 17.03.2017. Aggrieved by this, the 3^rd respondent consumer filed an appeal before the appellate authority.

3. The appellate authority found that the unauthorised load was 2828 watts instead of the 4000 watts found in the final assessment. There is absolutely no reason given in the order as to how the unauthorised load was reduced to 2828 watts. That apart, the appellate authority relied on the judgment in Sulabha Marketing (P) Ltd v. Kerala State Electricity Board, Thiruvananthapuram and others [ 2017 (3) KHC 563 ] while directing a revised assessment taking into account the fixed charges alone.

4. Sulabha Marketing’s case (supra) was reversed by the Apex Court in Kerala State Electricity Board and others v. Thomas Joseph and others [ 2023 11 SCC 700 ]. In view of the above, the order of the appellate authority cannot be sustained. Ext.P6 order is set aside with a direction to the Kerala State Electricity Appellate Authority to rehear Appeal No.98 of 2017 with notice to the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Fresh orders as directed above shall be passed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-