IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2010 / 7TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2577 of 2010(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- KUNHALI, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. BEERAN, SIJI MANZIL, PERUVAYAL AMSOM, KAYALAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, BOARD SECRETARIAT, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, 695 014, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THE OFFICE OF THE KSEB, KOVOOR, KOZHIKODE. 4. HASSAN KOYA, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. IBRAHIM, METHALERI, ERAVASSRI, PERUVAYAL AMSOM, KAYALAM DESOM, KAYALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN. R2 AND R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C)No. 2577 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 27th January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved of the drawing of electric lines through the property of the petitioner, which, according to him, is likely to cause irreparable loss, injury and hardship. It is the case of the petitioner, that the feasibility aspect has not been properly considered by the respondents 1 to 3 before proceeding with further steps. It is also the case of the petitioner that he has already moved the first respondent by filing Ext. P6 application and that the petitioner might be given an opportunity of hearing before finalization of the proceedings as above. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3. 3. Considering the nature of the relief proposed to be given, this Court does not find it necessary to issue notice to W.P.(C)No. 2577 OF 2010 2 R4. 4. In the above circumstances, taking note of the limited prayer made by the petitioner to have an opportunity of hearing before the proceedings are finalized by the first respondent , the said respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P6, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned, including the petitioner and also the 4th respondent and to finalise the proceedings as expeditiously as possible, at any rate , within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is made clear that till such appropriate orders are passed on Ext.P6, all further steps to draw the lines shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk