IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JANUARY 2010 / 16TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37600 of 2009(T) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- V.P.KUNHIMOIDEENKUTTY, AGED 60 YEARS, CHAIRMAN, ORPHANS EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST, P.O.EDAYOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION DIVISION, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRANS CONSTRUCTION DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, 220 K.V.SUB STATION SUB DIVISION, MALAPPARAMBA, PALACHODE P.O., PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION DIVISION, K.S.E.BOARD, EDARICODE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. MR.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/01/2010 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.37415 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.37600/2009 T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION. P2: COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE. P3: COPY OF REPLY NOTICE. P4: COPY OF NOTICE. P4(A): COPY OF NOTICE. P5: COPY OF OBJECTION BY THE PETITIONER. P6: COPY OF REPLY DTD. 2/11/2009 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ----------------------------- W.P(C) Nos.37415/2009 &37600/2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioners in these cases are stated as aggrieved of the steps taken by the respondent Board for drawing an electrical line 110 KV through their properties. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners came across the actual facts and figures only when notice was issued in connection with the cutting of the trees and immediately they approached the respondents, raising a dispute and pointing out a more feasible route for drawing the line. 3. The learned standing counsel for the respondents submits that there was an earlier dispute with somebody else. In such circumstances, the respondents referred the matter to the statutory authority/Additional District Magistrate to consider and pass appropriate orders and it is based on the order so passed by the Additional District Magistrate, that the line is now intended to be drawn through the property of the petitioners. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the finalization of the proceedings as above by the Additional District W.P(C) Nos.37415/2009 &37600/2009 2 Magistrate was without hearing the petitioners and their vested right to be heard before the dispute is finalised is virtually taken away. The learned standing counsel for the 'Board' submits that they are ready to refer the matter again to the Additional District Magistrate for fresh consideration and that the matter could be finalised after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, it is ordered that the concerned Additional District Magistrate having the jurisdiction over the concerned area in Malappuram District shall issue notice of hearing to all concerned who are the owners of the respective property and the matter shall be finalized afresh, in accordance with law, as early as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order passed by this Court in both the cases will continue till such time. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab