IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32188 of 2010(W) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- ELIZABETH JOHN, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O.JOHN, KURIKAYIL HOUSE, PUTHIYA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE J.MATHAIKAL. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTORATE, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 030. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 301. 3. K.K.SASI, MAPPANATTIL HOUSE, VALYATHARA, THEKKUMBHAGOM, TRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682 301. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR, R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B, R3 BY ADVS.SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA, SRI.GOPAKUMAR G. (ALUVA). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 32188 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T This writ petition has been filed mainly challenging Ext.P1 order passed by the first respondent against the proposal to draw electric lines over the property of the petitioner. Based on the petitioner's objections, the second respondent preferred a complaint before the first respondent in terms of section 16(1) of Electricity Act, 2003. After receipt of the said complaint a notice has been issued to the petitioner. As per the same, a hearing of the petition preferred by the second respondent was scheduled to be held on 17.8.2010. However, the specific contention of the petitioner is that he received the said notice only on the next day that is 18.8.2010. Subsequently, based on the hearing held on 17.8.2010 Ext.P1 order was passed by the first respondent on 25.9.2010. Apart from the aforesaid violation of the principles of natural justice Ext.P1 would reveal that it is an order passed without application of mind. An order adversely affecting the property rights of a person has to be passed WPC.No.32188/2010 : 2 : sagaciously. Ext.P1 cannot be construed as an order passed in proper exercise of the power under Section 16(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003. In this circumstances, this order is liable to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted back for fresh consideration of the first respondent. In the said circumstances, Ext.P1 is set aside to enable the first respondent to re-hear the matter with notice to the petitioner as also the 2nd and 3rd respondents. Fresh orders after such hearing shall be passed expeditiously. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge