IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 12153 of 2010(T) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- AFSA BEEVI, AGED 62, W/O.KUNJIKOCHU, THAREPARAMBIL, PUNNOORKODU, THOTTAKATTUKARA, ALUVA - 8. BY ADV. SRI.B.JAYASANKAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VIDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, EDAYAR P.O. R1 TO R2 BY SRI. P. P. THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.12153 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner in possession of 79 cents of land comprised in Survey No.393/3 of Karumalloor Village in Manjalikara. For the purpose of drawing a 33 KV line namely Mannani-Vadakkekara, a tower was erected in the petitioner's property. The petitioner, who is entitled to get compensation in terms of Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act for the damage sustained by him on account of erection of the tower and drawing the line, was served with Ext.P1 notice as early as on 21.12.2004. However, despite the lapse of about six years, the quantum of damages was not assessed and disbursed to the petitioner. It is in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. Indisputably, the petitioner is entitled to get compensation under Section 10 (d) of the Indian Telegraph Act and it is recognising the same that Ext.P1 notice was served on the petitioner. Though this Court directed the K.S.E.B to file a statement as early as on 7.4.2010, no statement was, so far been filed. Thus, no explanation is forthcoming for the undue delay. Hence, I am of the view that there is no reason for the W.P.(C) NO.12153/2010 2 inordinate delay in assessing and awarding the compensation even after serving notice as early as on 21.12.2004. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the competent authority under Section 10(d) of the Indian Telegraph Act is the Executive Engineer, K.S.E.B, Transmission Division, Ernakulam. The said authority is not arrayed as a party in this Writ Petition. In the circumstances explained above, in the interest of justice, the Executive Engineer, K.S.E.B, Transmission Division, Ernakulam is suo motu impleaded as additional third respondent in this Writ Petition. 3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the additional third respondent to pass orders under Section 10 (d) for payment of compensation, if not already passed, for the damage sustained by the petitioner on account of drawing of the 33 KV line across the petitioner's property and also for erection of the tower in it and for which she was served with Ext.P1 notice expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that the petitioner shall also be served with a copy of the order of compensation passed in terms of Section 10(d) of the Act. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.12153/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.12153/2010 4