IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 17020 of 2007(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SURESH BABU, PERUNILATHIL HOUSE, R.S.PURAM, ARUNOOTTIMANGALAM P.O., MULAKKULAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B, THALAYOLAPARAMBU. 3. K.K.PRAKASAN, KIZHAKKEKARA HOUSE, KULASEKHARAPURAM, ARUNOOTTIMANGALAM P.O.. 4. GOURI, VAKKE PARAMBATH, ARUNOOTTIMANGALAM P.O. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B SRI.T.A.SHAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC:NO.17020/2007-A: APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1--TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 15-1-2005. EXT.P2--TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 28-8-2006 EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT. EXT.P3--TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20-4-2007. EXT.P4--TRUE COPY OF THE BILL AND RECEIPT REMITTING THE MONTHLY CHARGES ON 28-4-2007. EXT.P5--TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DATED 8-5-2007. EXT.P6--TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGHT SKETCH. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3A--TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE PROPERTIES. EXT.R3A--TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 29-3-2007 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R3A--TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.186/2007 OF KADATHURUTHY POLICE STATION. //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No. 17020 of 2007-A ------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of January, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner applied for supply of electrical energy. It was found that the line has been drawn crossing the property of respondents 3 and 4. The petitioner had the sale deed and a purported consent letter by the 4th respondent. On that basis, Kerala State Electricity Board drew the line. Thereafter, the third respondent filed a complaint before the K.S.E.B authorities alleging fraud in the matter of obtaining the alleged consent letter. The Board withdrew the connection. The petitioner filed this writ petition on 4-6-2007. This Court directed that if the line is still in existence, re-connection shall be made. The petitioner is thus now enjoying electric supply. (2). The afore-said facts will show that the basic dispute between the petitioner and respondents 3 and 4 is whether the 4th respondent had consented to the drawal of the line and still further whether respondents 3 and 4 have any sustainable objection and whether the Additional District Magistrate can overrule the objections in terms of Indian Telegraph Act and Electricity Act. (3). Under the aforesaid circumstances, preserving status quo as on today, it is directed that the respondents 1 and 2 shall place W.P.C.No.17020/2007 -2- appropriate applications to the concerned District Magistrate for consideration of the case since respondents 3 and 4 are objecting to the drawal of the line. The District Magistrate shall decide the case in accordance with the Indian Telegraph Act and Electricity Act. Objections of respondents 3 and 4 to the drawal of line as per alignment shall be noted. If the District Magistrate concludes that the objections are sustained, the Board shall provide alternative alignment and dismantle the present alignment. However, if the objection is overruled, the line shall stand as such. The decision by the District Magistrate shall be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of this judgment. Thereafter continuance of energisation and alignment would depend upon such decision. The writ petition is disposed of as above. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. MS