IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 11566 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THANZIL, S/O MUHAMMED HANEEFA, RESIDING AT SHEREF MANZIL, PALACHIRA DESOM, CHERUNNIYOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYIMKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED SRI.M.ABDUL RASHEED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ATTINGAL DIVISION, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, CURBAN, POWER HOUSE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. AABIDA BEEVI, POOTHAKUNNUVILA VEEDU, CHANNAMPARA, KARAVARAM VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 11566 OF 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondent Board to draw the electric line from the eastern electric post and crossing the property of the petitioner so as to give connection to the 4th respondent, instead of drawing the line through the western boundary of the property of the petitioner, on the basis of the consent already given in this regard. It is also stated that the petitioner has already filed Ext.P2 representation before the 2nd respondent and that the same is pending. 2. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. 3. Considering the limited nature of relief prayed for, this Court does not find it necessary to issue any notice to the 4th respondent for the time being. The learned standing counsel for the Board submits that the representation preferred by the petitioner is actually before the 2nd respondent, which however can be caused to be forwarded to the concerned Assistant Executive Engineer and that the matter can be considered and finalized taking note of the specific contentions raised WP(C) No. 11566/2010 2 from the part of the petitioner. 4. In the above circumstance, the 2nd respondent shall forward Ext.P2 representation to the concerned Assistant Executive Engineer forthwith; on receipt of which, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the concerned Assistant Executive Engineer, for causing the line to be drawn through the property of the petitioner, in such manner as the consent has already been given in this regard. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc