Kerala High Court Grants Interim Relief To Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan Thrissur, Asks State Electricity Board To Not Disconnect Electricity Connection

These observations came in a plea by Bharatiya Vidya Mandir, Thrissur alleging that the Kerala State Electricity Board could not recover any sum from a customer after two years on the date from which the sum first became due.

The petitioners were aggrieved by the additional demand issued by the respondents for the consumption of electricity between 2009-2011, inclusive of 18% interest.

It was argued that the respondent's demand was barred by limitation under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003, which stated that the board could not recover any sum from a customer after two years on the date from which the sum first became due.

It was submitted that respondents had unilaterally decided the claimed interest and could not claim for the amount due prior to the demand.

They argued that to do so would amount to unjust enrichment.

The issue arose when the 1^st respondent (Kerala State Electricity Board) had issued the Kerala State Electricity Board Low Tension (other than Public Lighting) Tariff Order, 1999 for the classification of different categories of consumers and energy tariff respectively payable by them as per which educational institutions would fall under LT VI A category.

The petitioners had then filed a plea challenging the Tariff Revision Order whereby Educational Institutions were categorized into two types, in which Self Financing Educational Institutions were to be charged with higher commercial tariff rates than the other Educational Institutions.

The writ petition was dismissed and challenged before the Supreme Court which stated that no error was committed in fixing higher tariffs for the Self Financing Educational Institutions categorising them as commercial entities.

The respondent then issued a demand notice to remit the sum as required on 15.11.2023, more than three years after the Supreme Court decided the matter.

The petitioners filed the plea on the grounds that the demand notice issued by the respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice along with Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003. 

The petitioners thus prayed for the interim relief that the High Court direct the respondents not to disconnect the electricity connection pending disposal of this matter.

The standing counsel for the respondent opposed the grant of interim relief, arguing that the issue was considered by the court previously where the court held that the “interest component will have to be paid as the same will accrue on the arrear amount and since the interest component is compensatory in nature.”

The court however opined that whether the levy of interest was legal and justified and whether the demand made by the respondents was barred by limitation, were issues to be decided after a detailed hearing on the itycompletion of pleadings, and thus granted interim relief to the school.

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates Manjunath Menon and Arya Raghunath

Case Title: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan Thrissur Kendra and Anr. v. The Kerala State Electricity Board and Anr.

Case Number: WP (C) 1802 of 2024