IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 26TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11539 of 2007(W) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ RAHUL KAMIL, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. KAMIL, "RARUX", T.C.3/2060, KURUNGANOOR MURI, KAWDIYAR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, DISTRIBUTION (SOUTH), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL CIRCLE), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, KESAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SHRI C.K. KARUNAKARAN, SC, KSEB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.11539 OF 2007 W PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO.3526/2005 DATED 29.7.2005. EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF SANCTION ORDER ISSUED BY THE ELECTRICAL INSPECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING IN PETITIONER'S PROPERTY DATED 22.5.2000. EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING DATED 17.10.2005. EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.AE/KDPM/07-08/190/28.03.2007 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KESAVADASAPURAM TO THE PETITIONER. // TRUE COPY// PS TO JUDGE K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 11539 OF 2007 W -------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th September, 2008 JUDGMENT The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows: "i) Issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction to respondents to dismantle and remove the 11 KV overhead line which is not in use and passing through the property of the petitioner. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction directing the fourth respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioner." 2. The case of the petitioner is that a 11 KV overhead line is passing through his property. Subsequently, the said line, according to petitioner, is not in use by the Electricity Board from 2000 onwards. The 11 KV overhead line was substituted by underground cable under the Accelerated Power Development Reforms Programs (APDRP) in the year 2000. Case of the petitioner is that since the overhead line is not in WPC.11539/07 W 2 use, there is no need to maintain the same. Petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation and eliciting no response thereon, petitioner has approached this Court. 3. A Counter Affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondent Electricity Board producing Ext.R1(a) which purports to be passed disposing of Ext.P4 representation. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Electricity Board. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to establish any legal right as such, to cause removal of the overhead line. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge Ext.R1(a), if he is so advised, and also to approach any other statutory Forum for such rights as he is otherwise entitled in law. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.