IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 7611 of 2009(V) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ROHINI.C, AIKKARA HOUSE,PONAKAM, MAVELIKARA. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPBY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION,KSEB, MAVELIKARA. 4. UTHAMAN , DEVIKRIPA, PONAKAM, MAVELIKARA. R1 TO R3 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.7611 of 2009-V ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P6 permission granted under Sec.16 (1) of the Indian Telegraph Act to draw line to the house of the 4th respondent as per the first proposal of the 4th respondent (drawing only 10 metres weather proof wire from the existing post situated in the private pathway owned by the petitioner). 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondent Board. There is no appearance for the 4th respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that only a modification may be effected in so far as the line may be drawn as ordered along with private pathway owned by the petitioner, but, by shifting the post to the eastern side. According to her, there is a proposal to purchase the property which is lying on the further west and if it is materialised this will be a hindrance. Learned standing counsel was asked to get instruction. The learned standing counsel on instruction submits that it can be done WPC No. 7611/2009 -2- provided the petitioner meets the entire cost for doing so and the petitioner will have to put up another post. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is agreeable for the said proposal. In the light of this, the writ petition is disposed of modifying Ext.P6 only to the extent that the line will be drawn by shifting the existing post to the eastern side and by putting up another post also at the cost of the petitioner. The entire process must be completed within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, upon the petitioner remitting the entire amount due for which she may approach the 3rd respondent with a copy of this judgment immediately upon receipt of the same. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS