IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 23474 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. DILEEPSHA, S/O.ASSANARU PILLAI, FAYAS MANZIL, SASRATHY, T.K.M.C.P.O., KOLLAM. 2. RAJANI.A, D/O.REMANI, GOKULAM, SARATHY, T.K.M.C. P.O., KOLLAM BY ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM. 3. NABEESATH BEEVI, W/O.NAZEER, BILAL MANZIL, SARATHY, T.K.M.C.P.O., KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON,SC,KSEB FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.23474/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIKOLLOOR DATED 13.8.2011. EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.8.2011. EXT.P3. PHOTOS SHOWING THE PRESENT POSITION OF TELEPHONE POST AND ELECTRIC POST AND ENCROACHED AREA OF THE PATHWAY. / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.23474 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of September, 2011 JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed apprehending that the second respondent is likely to shift electricity post No.16501/05 from which electricity line has been drawn to the residences of the petitioners from its present position. The petitioners state that if the post is shifted it will affect the movement of vehicles along the pathway leading to their residences. 2. Sri.K.M.Sathyanatha Menon, learned counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board submitted on instructions received from the second respondent that there is no proposal to shift the electricity post referred to in the writ petition. Such being the situation, I am of the opinion that the petitioners cannot have any grievance. The learned standing counsel also submitted that though the third respondent has filed a petition objecting to the erection of the post, there is no merit in the objection for the reason that the electricity post has been erected within the W.P(C).No.23474 of 2011 -:2:- pathway and not in the land belonging to the third respondent. The writ petition is accordingly closed recording the said submission and reserving liberty with the petitioners to move this Court afresh or other competent authorities, if occasion arises in future. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.23474 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 5th September, 2011