IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 16192 of 2010(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SREEKUAMR, KEECHERIL, PALLIPPAD, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTICITY BOARD, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDYUTHI BHAVAN PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DY CHIEF ENGINEER ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SECTION, HARIPAD. BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC FOR KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.16192 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar,C. J. This writ petition is filed with the prayers as follows:- (i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, or order directing the respondents to accommodate the K.S.E.Board Office in Pallippad in the building owned by SCS No.1777 Society, proposed and recommended by the Grama Panchayat. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing the respondents not to close down the Overseer's Office in Pallippad under the guise of upgrading the same. (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing the 1st respondent to consider the grievances placed by the people and to have a discussion with the Panchayat Authorities, before closing down its present office and opening a new one at Muttom. The petitioner is a resident of Pallippad Grama Panchayat and also the President of the said Panchayat. The substance of the grievance in the writ petition is that the respondents are shifting an existing local office W.P(C).No.16192 of 2010 -:2:- of the Kerala State Electricity Board from one location to another location in disregard of the opinion of the Grama Panchayat. Hence the present writ petition. 2. We are afraid that the question as to where a public office is required to be located is not a matter which is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The State is the best Judge to make an assessment of the suitability of the location of the office. The issue, in our opinion, is no more res integra and covered by a decision of the Supreme Court in J.R.Raghupathy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1988 SC 1681. At paragraph 9 the Supreme Court held as follows:- “9. It will serve no useful purpose to delineate the facts in all the cases which follow more or less on the same lines. We are of the opinion that the High Court had no jurisdiction to sit in appeal over the decision of the State Government to locate the Mandal Headquarters at a particular place. The decision to locate such Headquarters at a particular village is dependent upon various factors. The High Court obviously could not evaluate for itself the comparative merits of a particular place as against the other for location of the Mandal Headquarters. In some of the cases the High Court declined to interfere saying that the W.P(C).No.16192 of 2010 -:3:- Government was the best Judge of the situation in the matter of location of Mandal Headquarters.” In the circumstances we do not see any merit in the writ petition. The same is dismissed at the admission stage. J.CHELAMESWAR, Chief Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.16192 of 2010 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 26th May, 2010