IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2010 / 13TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 25246 of 2010(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. A.SHAMEER AHAMMED, S/O.LATE S.M.ABDUL HAMEED, AGED 40 YEARS, MUNNAR COLONY, MUNNAR P.O. 2. G.MANI, S/O.GOPAL, AGED 54 YEARS, LEKSHMI BHAVANAM, HOUSE NO.IX/1013A, DEVIKULAM ROAD, MUNNAR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.N.M.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENTS (RA), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695 001. 2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTHIBHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 3. THE KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PLANTATIONS COMPANY REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER ENGINEERING, REGIONAL OFFICE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B. R3 BY ADVS. SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS, SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN, SRI.BINU MATHEW, SRI.TERRY V.JAMES, SRI.B.J.JOHN PRAKASH, SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL). THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.25246 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 5th October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners who are permanent residents of Munnar applied for power connection to the third respondent who is the licencee for power supply in Munnar area. This writ petition has been filed feeling aggrieved by the inordinate delay in the matter of granting power connection. The third respondent has filed a statement in this writ petition. Along with the statement Annexure R3(b) judgment of this Court in W.P.(C)No.5098/2009 filed by the second petitioner herein has been produced. The said writ petition was disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner therein/second petitioner herein to make available the documents required of him and then directing the competent respondent viz., the third respondent therein to take a decision in the matter upon receipt of such documents. Subsequently, the first petitioner was issued with Ext.P5. As per the said letter, the third respondent has informed the first petitioner that in view of the status quo order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court they are not in a position to give power supply. A similar intimation was given to the second petitioner as well, as is obvious from Ext.R3(c). However, it is common case that in SLP (C).No.11582/2007 WP(C).No.25246/2010 2 the Hon'ble Apex Court ordered to maintain status quo with respect to the construction of the river banks. There was no prohibition for granting of power connection. When an application is submitted for power connection to the third respondent who is the licencee for power supply in Munnar area, the third respondent is bound to consider the same in accordance with the provisions and to take a decision with respect to the request for grant of power connection. In this case, it is all the more necessary in view of Ext.R3(b) judgment whereby, in the said writ petition filed by the second petitioner a specific direction was issued to consider the claim of the petitioners for grant of power connection in case they produce all the required documents. The submission of the petitioners is that they have produced all the required documents in their possession. Admittedly, the petitioners did not produce the attested copy of the patta for the land on which the concerned buildings situate and the land tax receipts in respect of the said buildings. The question is whether the failure to produce the said documents could be a reason to reject the request for grant of power connection. 2. This Court has earlier considered identical writ petitions in Ext.R3(a) judgment and also in W.P.(C)No.3958 of 2007 wherein observing that supply of electric energy to the buildings concerned would not and could not mean legalization of the construction of the building WP(C).No.25246/2010 3 directions were issued to provide electric connection to the concerned prospective consumers, if they are otherwise eligible.. Taking into account Ext.R3(a) judgment and also the judgment in W.P.(C)No.3958 of 2007 I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition as hereunder:- In case the petitioners have produced all the other documents non-production of the attested copy of the patta for the land on which the concerned buildings situate and the land tax receipts shall not stand as a reason to reject the request and in which event, the third respondent shall grant power connection to the petitioners' buildings in case they are otherwise eligible, as expeditiously as possible. 3. The learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that in the case of the second petitioner, he is living in an extent of four cents of Government land having no Patta right and as per the Village records the said land belongs to the Government. In the case of the first petitioner, the objection is that the said building is situated within 50 yards from Munnar river and therefore, the construction of the building itself is unauthorised. It is made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the competent authorities in taking appropriate action for evicting the second petitioner in accordance with law and also taking action against the construction made by the first petitioner in accordance with law. In other words, it is made clear that this order will not confer WP(C).No.25246/2010 4 any right on the second petitioner on Government land alleged to have been occupied by him and on the first petitioner it will not legalise the construction of the concerned buildings. In case any action has been initiated either for eviction or for illegal construction the receipt of electric connection based on this judgment shall not be assigned and accepted as a ground of defence. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS