ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records in Lr.No.Se.Po/O.Pu/U.Ka.A/Ka.Mea.7/Ko.Vazhaku/A.No.795/2020, dated 10.07.2020 from the file of the third respondent, quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from adding the demand of Rs.29,07,267/- with the electricity consumption charges for the S.C.No.050-003-1409 within the jurisdiction of the fourth respondent.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner is a Private Limited Company registered under the Indian Companies Act and engaged in the business of manufacturing Corrugated Carton Boxes. The petitioner entered a lease agreement with the landlord on 31.08.2011. Thereafter, he came to know that there was electricity arrears by the previous tenant, namely M/s.Athi Sakthi Spinners to the tune of Rs.14,46,977/- and the said amount was not paid by the previous tenants. Challenging the same, the previous tenant filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.30556 of 2008, subsequently, the same withdrawn by them and they vacated the premises. Thereafter, the petitioner came to possession of the subject property in the year 2011 and thereafter, the present impugned demand notice was issued on 10.07.2020 demanding a sum of Rs.29,07,267/- from the petitioner. Challenging the same, the above writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the total demand made to the previous tenants is Rs.14,46,977/-, out of which, they have paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on 30.01.2009, hence, the balance arrears amount to be paid as on 30.01.2009 is Rs.9,46,977/-. However, the third respondent has passed the present impugned order demanding a sum of Rs.29,07,267/-, which includes the belated payment surcharge of Rs.19,60,290/- for 138 months from February 2009 to July 2020. He also submits that, during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner paid more than a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as per the directions issued by this Court. In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2023 0 Supreme (SC) 555, wherein, the Apex Court held that, with regard to penalty and belated payment surcharge, the Electricity Board has to exercise its discretionary power and pass appropriate orders. Hence, he prays that, this Court may issue a direction to the official respondents to exercise the discretion for reduction of the belated payment surcharge, within a reasonable time that may be fixed by this Court.

4. On the above contentions, heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and perused the materials available on record.

5. Admittedly, the principal arrears amount payable by the previous tenant is Rs.9,46,977/- and the belated payment surcharge is Rs.19,60,290/-, totally, a sum of Rs.29,07,267/-. Though the previous tenant is liable to pay the principal arrears amount, however, the petitioner had paid more than the principal arrears amount of the previous tenant as per the conditional orders passed by this Court. 6. The Apex Court, passed a judgment in the case of K.C.Ninan Vs. Kerala State Electricity Board & Ors. reported in 2023 0 Supreme (SC) 555 and the relevant portion of the judgment is as follows :

“327. Taking all facts and circumstances into consideration, including the lapse of more than two decades since the appeals were filed before this Court and the equities arising in favour of one party or the other, we direct the Electric Utilities to waive the outstanding interest accrued on the principal dues from the date of application for supply of electricity by the auction purchasers.

I. Conclusions

328. The conclusions are summarised below:

a. The duty to supply electricity under Section 43 of the 2003 Act is not absolute, and is subject to the such charges and compliances stipulated by the Electric Utilities as part of the application for supply of electricity;

b. The duty to supply electricity under Secti