IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 17494 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O.PADMANABHA PILLAI, KRISHNALAYAM, MELILA, KUNNIKODU, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE KOLLAM. 2. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KOLLAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATHANAPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, VILAKUDI. 5. JAYASREE KUMARI, KOTTAKONATHU VEEDU, MELILA, KUNNIKODU, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED HASHIM R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Shg WP(C).No. 17494 of 2009(F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1. COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE OF THE PROPERTY. P2. COPY OF THE OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 11.04.2008. P3. COPY OF NOTICE M4-22294/08 DATED 16.05.2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4. COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 31.05.2008 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5. COPY OF THE ORDER NO.KDS/22294/08/M4 DATED 09.06.2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6. COPY OF PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.06.09. P7. COPY OF PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.06.09. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/ P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No.17494 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this court with the following reliefs:- 1. A writ of certiorari or other appropriate wirt or order to call for the records leading to the issue of Exhibits P5 and quash the same. 2. A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders Exhibit P6, after affording an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard, and keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P5 till such time. 3. A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent not to cause any damage to the petitioner's cultivation and building and also direct to consider the alternate way before implementing Exhibit P5. 4. A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P7 petition after affording opportunity to the petitioner to be heard. 5. Any other further relief or order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice. 6. Award the cost of these proceedings. 2. When the matter came up for admission on 24.6.2009, an interim stay was granted for two months. The WPC.No.17494 OF 2009 : 2 : learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, prior to communicating the said order, the respondent drew the electric line through the property of the petitioner. The limited relief prayed for in such circumstance is, to direct the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P7 preferred by the petitioner. 3. Heard Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent as well. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to consider Ext.P7 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the interested parties. Final orders as above shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ( P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) jma