IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 29TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 5129 of 2009(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOS I.AMBOOKAN ALIAS OUSEPACHAN, MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.IQBAL & COMPANY LTD HINDUSTHAN PETROLEUM DEALER, KODAKARA RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:\SIDING AT AMBOOKAN HOUSE MUKUNDAPURAM, THRISSUR BY ADV. MR.P.V.JAYACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NO.8/117, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA ARUMUKHAM COLONY, CHANDRA NAGAR PALAKKAD 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KSEB ELECTRICAL SECTION, KODAKARA BY ADV.MR.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB FOR R2 MR.THOMAS ANTONY, SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 5129 OF 2009 I ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is conducting a petroleum dispensing unit at Kodakara in the property belonging to one Kunjannamma. According to the petitioner, it was taken on lease by a Company which was ultimately taken over by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation. It is not in dispute that there is a proposal of widening the road by the 1st respondent. By Ext.P1, the National Highway Authority of India has issued a letter asking the petitioner to close the pump and remove the installation within one week. According to the petitioner, the petitioner approached this court by filing WP(C) No.4324/09 and obtained an interim order against Ext.P1. In the meantime, the electric connection to the petitioner's pump has been disconnected. Accordingly, the petitioner has approached this court seeking to quash Ext.P2 and to restore the electric supply. In Ext.P2, what is stated is that there is no direction by this court to restore the connection. In the said writ petition ie, WPC.4324/09, judgment has been pronounced directing the 1st respondent to consider the request of the WPC.5129/09 : 2 : petitioner and not to proceed with Ext.P1. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.P.V.Jayachandran, learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent and learned standing counsel for KSEB. Learned standing counsel for KSEB submits that the disconnection was effected on the basis of the requisition by the 1st respondent. 3. In the light of the fact that Ext.P1 itself has been kept in abeyance, I feel that till a decision is taken on Ext.P2, the connection can be restored. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to restore the power supply to the petroleum pump of the petitioner, of which the petitioner is a Franchise, upon the petitioner paying reconnection charges and also executing an undertaking in this court to pay the entire amounts due to the 2nd respondent if any amount remains to be paid and any further amount as may become due to the 2nd respondent on the basis of the restoration of the connection to the petitioner's pump. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks