IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 WA.No. 914 of 2011() -------------------- APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS ------------------------- 1. CHANDRAVALLI, AGED 58, W/O.CHELLAPPAN, THATHANKODU SREEKALA SADANAM,CHITTAR P.O, MANAKKAYAM,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SYAMALA, AGED 53,THATHANKODU SREEKALA SADANAM, CHITTAR P.O,MANAKKAYAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEFF SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA) RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,PATHANAMTHITTA 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,KERALA STATE ELECTRIITY BOARD,CHITTAR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CHITTAR,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. BHASKARAN,S/O.LAKSHMIKUTTI, ALUMTHARAYIL HOUSE,CHITTAR P.O,MANAKKAYAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER, G.GOPAKUMAR SC FOR KSEB, P.P.THAJUDEEN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. NO. 914 OF 2011 = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. Writ appeal is filed challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to interfere with the first respondent's order permitting drawal of weather proof cable from a post standing in the petitioners' property for giving connection to the 4th respondent. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and have gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge. What we notice is that an electric post is already standing in the property of the appellants, that too, near a pathway. The line drawn is only a weather proof cable of 19.3 metres to give connection to the house of the 4th respondent. Weather proof cable is a benign cable which cannot cause any kind of inconvenience to the appellants. We do not find any merit in the challenge against the approval granted by the District Magistrate on account of the objection raised by the appellants. We notice that the learned Single Judge has considered all the objections raised by the W.A. 914/2011 2 appellants and the alternate suggestions made by them, which are not practical. Consequently, the writ appeal is dismissed. However, the dismissal of the writ appeal does not bar the appellants to request for shifting the post to any other point within their property, to KSEB, which will allow it if it is required for facilitating construction of the building. However, shifting should not lead to denial of supply to 4th respondent. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE). P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE) knc/-