IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2011 / 9TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22402 of 2011(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- S.AJITH, TC 30/835, DERA 47, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. THE CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-685 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER AUTHORITY, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR FOR R1 SMT.AMBIKA DEVI FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.22402/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 30.5.11 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND V.GNANA GANDHI. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF BILL DATED 4.7.11 ISSUED BY THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 4.8.11 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH THE LOCATION SKETCH. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22402 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 31st day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the tenant of a house bearing Door No.T.C 30/835 of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation. On account of block in the main water connection, water supply to his residence is disrupted. According to the petitioner, repair is possible only if the tarred portion of the road is cut open and that, on the complaint made by the land lord, 2nd respondent has sought permission of the 1st respondent. However, 1st respondent has not passed any order in the mater, and as a result of this, water supply still remains disrupted. It is with this allegation, the writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to repair the disrupted water supply to his house and also to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the request made by the 2nd respondent. 2. While the 2nd respondent reiterates that a request as claimed by the petitioner has been made to the 1st respondent, on behalf of the 1st respondent, standing counsel submits that not only that they have received any request from the 2nd respondent, WPC No. 22402/11 :2 : they have also not received any application from the petitioner. It is stated that, as per the procedure followed by the 1st respondent, enclosing sketch of the area of the road which is to be cut open, petitioner should make an application, and that, on receipt of the application, estimate will be prepared and the applicant will have to remit the cost of repair. It is stated that thereafter orders will be passed and based on such orders, the work can be carried out by the 2nd respondent. 3. In the light of the submission thus made by the standing counsel for the 1st respondent and in the absence of any document produced by the petitioner or the 2nd respondent to the effect that any requests made by them are pending consideration of the 1st respondent, the only order that is possible is to leave it open to the petitioner to make an application as suggested by the 1st respondent and to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on such application. 4. In that view of the matter, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:- (1) It will be open to the petitioner to make his application enclosing a copy of Ext.P4 sketch at the concerned Zonal Office of WPC No. 22402/11 :3 : the 1st respondent. (2) It is directed that once such an application is made as above, the concerned Engineer of the 1st respondent will conduct inspection and intimate the charges that are to be remitted by the petitioner. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible at any ate within 10 days of receipt of the application. (3) Once the intimation is given as above, it will be open to the petitioner to comply with the procedural formalities and thereupon the 2nd respondent will take up necessary repair works for restoring water to the petitioner's residential premises. Needless to say that the 2nd respondent shall do it within ten days thereafter. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp