IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 25007 of 2008(B) --------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- A.V.JOSE, MANAGING PARTNER, ALUKKAS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT UNIT, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 2. THE POWER GRIND CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. REP. BY THE CHIEF MANAGER, MAVELIPURAM COLONY, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-30. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN - R1 BY SC SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI - R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 25007 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is aggrieved by the move on the part of the second respondent to deal with his property in circumstances, which, according to him, attracts Section 10 read with Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act. 2. I heard learned Senior Counsel Sri.Balakrishna Iyer, learned counsel for the second respondent besides the learned Government Pleader. 3. Petitioner has already addressed Ext.P5 before the first respondent. I would think that the interests of justice would be met if the first respondent considers Ext.P5 and decides whether permission can be granted within the meaning of Section 16. If the petitioner has alternate proposals, that will also be considered by the first respondent. The first respondent will decide the matter in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also the second respondent. In view of the urgency pleaded before me by the second respondent, I issue the further directions: Petitioner or his representative and the second respondent or its representative shall be present before the first respondent on 27.8.2008 at 11 a.m., and thereupon the first respondent will proceed to consider the matter WPC.25007/2008. 2 and take a decision within a period of two weeks from the date of hearing the parties. It is open to the petitioner to request before the first respondent that a local inspection also be made. Needless to say, without obtaining permission as required under law, nothing shall be done over the petitioner's property by the second respondent unless it is sanctioned by law. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb