Judgment :- 1. The Kerala State Electricity Board is constituted under S.5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, for short the Supply Act. 2. The powers and duties of the Electricity Boards ace prescribed by the provisions contained in Chapter IV of the Supply Act. S.26 provides that subject to the provisions of the Supply Act, the Board shall, in respect of the whole State, have all the powers and obligations of a licensee under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (Act 9 of 1910). It has further been provided that the Supply Act shall be deemed to be the licence of the Board for the purposes of that Act. That does not mean that the Board has all the duties and obligations of a licensee under the Indian Electricity Act. A reference in this connection to the first proviso to S.26 of the Supply Act is profitable. The proviso says that nothing in S.3 to 11, sub-ss. (2) and (3) of S.21 and S.22, Sub-s.(2) of S.22-A and S.23 and 27 of the Electricity Act or in Clauses I to V, Clauses VII and IX to XII of the Schedule to the Act relating to the duties and obligations of a licensee shall apply to the Board. The other previsions in the Supply Act are not relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue now before me and therefore I do not propose to burden this judgment with the details of the other sections. 3. S.26 of the Supply Act governs the rights, duties and obligations of both the licensee and the consumer in regard to matters relating to meters. The amount of energy supplied to a consumer or the electrical quantity contained in the supply is ascertained by meats of a comet meter installed in the premises of the consumer, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary. (Sub-s. 1). Sub-s. 2 provides that where the licensee fails to get the meter corrected, the consumer shall cease to be liable to pay for the hire of the meter. Similarly where the consumer fails to get the defect in the meter rectified, the licensee may cut the supply. In case the Board finds that the meter is defective, the proper course is to proceed under Sub-s. 4 of S.26. Similarly where the consumer fails to get the defect in the meter rectified, the licensee may cut the supply. In case the Board finds that the meter is defective, the proper course is to proceed under Sub-s. 4 of S.26. The consumer has no authority to connect any meter on any electric supply line through which energy is supplied by the Board, or disconnect the same from any such electric supply line, but he may by giving not less than 48 hours notice in writing to the Board require the Board to connect or disconnect such meter and en receipt of any such requisition the Board shall comply with it within the period of the notice. It has been so provided under Sub-s. S. 4. Sub-s. 6 provides that when any difference or dispute arises as to whether any meter referred to in Sub-s.1 is or is not correct, the matter shall be decided upon the application of either party, by an Electrical Inspector. This sub-section prescribes the requirements which should be complied with in case of meters which are not correct. They are: (1) the controversy regarding the question whether or not a meter is not correct, as already observed, roust be referred to an Electrical Inspector. (2) such reference can be made upon an application made by either party. (3) the Electrical Inspector thereupon shall decide the issue whether the meter has ceased to be correct. (4) the Electrical Inspector on entering the finding that the meter is not correct, shall estimate the amount of energy supplied to the consumer during the period in dispute. (5) such estimate however, can be made, only for a maximum period of six months. This section further says that the register of the meter shall, save as aforesaid, and in the absence of fraud be conclusive proof of such amount or quantity. The proviso to this sub-section provides that before either a licensee or a consumer applies to the Electrical Inspector under the Sub-section, he shall give to the said party not less than 7 days' notice of his intention so to do. Sub-s. 7 and the provisos thereto and the explanation need not be referred to in this context because these provisions have nothing to do with the question involved in the case. 5. Sub-s. 7 and the provisos thereto and the explanation need not be referred to in this context because these provisions have nothing to do with the question involved in the case. 5. It is therefore evident from the above provisions that the right of correction is restricted for a period of six months. The object in enacting this prevision appears to be that the Beard is bound to take expeditious steps for rectifying the defects of the meter. It follows therefore that unless the demand is based on the determination by the Inspector of the consumption of the energy in accordance with S.26 (6), the same cannot be enforced in law. 6. The impugned orders Exts. P1 and P2 considered in the light of the principles enunciated above, are liable to be set at naught, as the demand made thereunder admittedly is not based on the determination of the dispute by the Electrical Inspector, in terms of Sub-s. 6 of S.26. If that be the position, these orders are liable to be quashed. I accordingly quash the same. 7. It is the common case of the parties that Ext. P4 representation made by the petitioner in regard to the dispute has not so far been disposed of by the third respondent. The third respondent therefore is directed to consider and dispose of Ext. P4 representation as expeditiously as possible, in any event within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment keeping in view the principles laid down in this judgment. The decision of the third respondent on Ext. P4 representation will, subject to further appeal, if any, be binding en the parties. The O. P. is allowed to the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs. Issue photostat copy on usual terms.