IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2009 / 26TH SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 780 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.11299/2009 Dated 22/06/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- BABURAJ, AGED 46, S/O. MADHAVAN, NJATTUVETTY HOUSE, PAZHUVIL WEST, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUDHA SUKUMARAN, W/O. SUKUMARAN, NJATTUVETTY HOUSE, PAZHUVIL P.O., THIRUSSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KATTOOR, THIRUSSUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 19276 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ---------------------------------- R.P.NO.780/09 & W.P.(C).No.19276/2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August, 2009. JUDGMENT The review sought for is of the judgment in WP(c). No.11299/09, where this court by judgment dated 22nd June 2009 directed that Ext.P1, the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate exercising his powers under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act and Indian Electricity Act, 2003, be implemented. 2. In WP(c).No.19276/09, the petitioner seeks an order directing the authorities not to implement the aforesaid order of the Additional District Magistrate, which in view of the judgment in WP(c).No.11299/09, cannot be granted. 3. According to the petitioner the Additional District Magistrate himself has initiated proceedings for reviewing the order passed by him. It is stated by the petitioner that, WP(c).No.19276/09 & RP.No.780/09 2 even though what is permitted by the Additional District Magistrate is shifting of an existing line, he is aggrieved by the alignment through which the line is now allowed to be drawn and therefore the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate and the direction of this court to implement the said order shall not stand in his way to make an application for shifting the present line or shall not fetter the powers of the Additional District Magistrate in considering such applications or passing orders thereon. 4. I heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP (c).No. 11299/09, standing counsel for the KSE Board and the learned Government Pleader. 5. One has to accept the fact that, if there are justifiable circumstances, it is always open to the Addl. District Magistrate to consider an application for shifting an existing line. Therefore, the order that is already passed or the judgment of this court directing its implementation or the fact that the line has been drawn cannot stand in the way of the WP(c).No.19276/09 & RP.No.780/09 3 Additional District Magistrate in exercising such statutory powers. Accordingly, the review petition and writ petition are disposed of directing that, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the alignment through which the line is now drawn, it will be open to them to move the Additional District Magistrate seeking shifting of the line, in which event it will be entirely up to that authority to consider the application on merits and deal with the same with notice to all concerned and pass orders thereon in accordance with law. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).No.19276/09 & RP.No.780/09 4