Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 622 (KER)

Mother Superior v. Kerala Water Authority

2004-12-08

K.THANKAPPAN

body2004
JUDGMENT : K. Thankappan, J. The Original Petition is filed for quashing Ext.P 1, P2, P3 and P5. Petitioner is the Mother Superior, Avila Convent, Kandanad. Water connection was given to the petitioner for domestic purposes. While so, the 3rd respondent by Ext.Pl informed the petitioner that disconnection of water supply should be effected for the reason that the water charge was paid by the petitioner at domestic rate. By Ext.P2 the petitioner was also informed that as average consumption was very high, the petitioner had to change the connection from domestic rate into non-domestic rate and the petitioner was directed to attend the 3rd respondent's office on 22.4.1997 to settle the matter. By Ext.P3 the petitioner was directed to execute an agreement for changing the connection into non-domestic. Petitioner filed Ext.P4 representation before the 2nd respondent stating that the water was used only for domestic purpose. By Ext.P5 order the 3rd respondent rejected the petitioner's representation and the petitioner was requested to remit the dues and execute a new agreement for the conversion from domestic to non-domestic. Aggrieved by the above, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2. The stand taken by the respondents is that though the connection has been given for domestic purposes, on inspection it is found that water was used for non-domestic purposes also. The respondents contended that the average monthly consumption of more than 57 KL of drinking water by the petitioner could not be treated as domestic connection. The respondents also contended that institution like convent was categorised as non-domestic. Further it is contended that the petitioner had accommodated students also in the convent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner convent is a domestic establishment, the use of water is only domestic purposes and hence the petitioner is liable to pay the water charges at domestic tariff. Reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on a decision of this Court in Social S.G. of Assist Sisters v. K.S.E.B. ( 1998 (1) KLT 727 ). In the above decision a Division Bench of this Court while considering S.22B of the Electricity Act, 1910 held that convent and monastery are not commercial establishments. Learned counsel also relied on, a decision reported in Asst. In the above decision a Division Bench of this Court while considering S.22B of the Electricity Act, 1910 held that convent and monastery are not commercial establishments. Learned counsel also relied on, a decision reported in Asst. Executive Engineer v. Seetharama Rao ( 1999 (2) KLT 624 ), in which S.37 of the Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1986 was considered by this Court and made an observation that the restaurant had to be treated separately from the lodging house. 4. In sub-s.(f) of S.2 of the Kerala Water Authority (Water Supply) Regulations, 1991 the term "domestic connection" is defined as "a category of water supply connection provided from the main to premise to supply water for domestic purposes". S.37 of the Kerala Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1966 reads as follows:- 37. Definition of Supply of water for domestic purposes.- The supply of water for domestic purposes under this Act means supply of water for any purpose except the following, namely:- (a) for any commerce or trade, manufacture or business; (b) for gardens or for purposes of irrigation; Explanation:- In respect of premises used solely for residential purposes and having attached kitchen and domestic gardens, such domestic gardens shall not be treated as gardens for the purpose of this clause. A reading of the above provisions would indicate that supply of water for residential purposes is coming under domestic purpose. The question to be decided is whether the petitioner is entitled for water charges at domestic rate or not. The petitioner-convent is the residential places of women devoted to religious life and thus outside the purview of commercial establishments. The mere fact that average consumption of water per month is very high is the reason to include the petitioner in the non-domestic category, is not sustainable. The allegation that the petitioner has accommodated students in the convent would not show that it is a lodging house or any monthly rent has been collected from them. That apart the petitioner-convent is the residential places of sisters and nuns. 5. In the above circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner-convent is liable to pay rates for the water consumed at domestic rates and not at non-domestic rates. Ordered accordingly. Hence, Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P5 are quashed and the Original Petition is allowed.