IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2008 / 29TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 20515 of 2008(P) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MANONMANI, SIVASAKTHIVILASOM VEEDU, NADUKKAD, PALLICHAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, NEYYATTINKARA. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 5. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B. R4 & R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.20515 OF 2008 P PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OS NO.49/07 DATED 24.1.2007 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, NEYYATTINKARA. EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND SKETCH. EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.D.DIS.8065/07/S1 DATED 18.10.2007 ISSUED BY FIFTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.6.2008 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.6.2008 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FIFTH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE ALIGNMENT OF 11 KV LINE AND THE INSTALLED TRANSFORMER. // True Copy // PS to Judge K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 20515 OF 2008 P -------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st October, 2008 JUDGMENT The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows: “(i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P3 and to quash the same by the writ of certiorari. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or writ of similar nature or order or direction commanding the fifth respondent to consider Ext.P5 and to shift the transformer from the eastern side of petitioner's property immediately. (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or writ of similar nature or order or direction restraining the respondents No.1 to 3 from energizing the transformer installed in front of petitioner's property till the disposal of Ext.P5 by fifth respondent.” 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the installation of a transformer. According to her, the transformer is installed in front of her property and the drawal of the electric line from it WPC.20515/08 P 2 through her property is without approaching the fifth respondent. The transformer is put up blocking entry to her house and the line is drawn without following the procedure under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act. Petitioner filed a civil suit and obtained statusquo order. But, the Suit came to be dismissed on the ground that the Suit is not maintainable. A Counter Affidavit is filed wherein it is, inter alia, stated as follows: The transformer occupies only 75 Cms. of the frontage of the petitioner's property and it covers 1.30Mt. of the frontage of the neighbouring property owner. Ext.R2(a) sketch is produced. It is stated that the LT lines passing through the property of petitioner was constructed almost twentyfive years ago for giving service connection to about ten consumers. It is further stated that the shifting of the LT lines can be considered only on work deposit basis and after hearing the beneficiaries of the distribution line. The total road frontage of the petitioner's property is about 13 Mts. 3. Petitioner has filed a Reply Affidavit reiterating her WPC.20515/08 P 3 contentions. She also relies on Ext.P2 Report of the Advocate Commission obtained from the civil court. I feel that the fifth respondent District Magistrate should look into the question. The reason stated in Ext.P3 is that Suit is pending. Since the Suit has been dismissed on the ground that it is not maintainable, I feel that the District Magistrate should consider the matter. In such circumstances, Ext.P3 is quashed and the fifth respondent is directed to consider the matter and take a decision. In order to facilitate an early disposal of the matter, petitioner and the third respondent will be present before the fifth respondent at 11 A.M. on 5.11.2008 and the fifth respondent will consider the matter and take a decision in accordance with law within a period of one month thereafter. It is also open to the fifth respondent to conduct a site inspection in the course of considering the matter. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.