IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 18395 of 2007(M) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- PRASANNA, AGED 42 YEARS, W/O.CHANDRAN, UTHARA BHAVANAM, KARAKKAD P.O., CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE, SRI.A.V.JOJO. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ALAPPPUZHA. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, K.S.E.B. ARANMULA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. RAGHAVAN, S/O.VELUTHU KUNJU, PALAKKUNNUMODIYIL, PADINJARE CHARUVIL HOUSE, KARAKKAD MURI, MULAKKUZHA VILLAGE, CHNGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA. 4. MOHANAN, MOHANAVILASAM HOUSE, KARAKKAL MURI, MULAKKUZHA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA. R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 18395 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T This writ petition has been filed in the year 2007 raising grievances against Ext.P5 order passed by the first respondent under section 16(1) of the Telegraph Act, 1885 read with section 51 of the Electricity Act, 2003. As per the said order permission was granted to draw over head electric line through the pathway leading to the property of the petitioner for the purpose of drawing electric lines to the property of respondents 3 and 4. Evidently, as early as on July 2007, the line was drawn as proposed. The order dated 5.7.2007 of this Court would reveal that this Court has granted liberty to the KSEB to charge the line and subsequently it was energised. At this distance of time especially in the absence of any patent perverseness or illegality in the order permitting the second respondent to draw line for the purpose of granting electric connection to respondents 3 and 4 Ext.P5 order cannot be interfered with. The petitioner has failed to bring out any reason for interference. Therefore, there is no merit in this writ petition and accordingly, it is dismissed. However, this will not stand in the way of the petitioner moving WPC.No.18395/2010 : 2 : the authority under section 17 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 in accordance with law. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge