IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 28433 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.PRATHAPACHANDRAN, S/O. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ANANDA BHAVAN, KALLAMBALAM, BALARAMAPURAM P.O. BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, ELECTRICAL SECTION, NEYYATTINKARA. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, NEYYATTINKARA. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 28433 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 9th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a cable T.V. net work operator. He has drawn cable lines through electricity posts belonging to the Kerala State Electricity Board. The Board took action against them for removal of the same. They approached this court and this court granted two months time for removal of the same. Despite the same, they have not removed the same. Now the petitioner submits that he has filed Ext.P6 representation before the 2nd respondent for permission to use the electric posts, which, the Asianet, another cable T.V. operator, having a contract with the Electricity Board for drawing electric lines, is not using to draw cable TV lines, for which he is prepared to pay the charges fixed by the electricity board. The petitioner now seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the same. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Board stoutly opposes the prayer. According to him, the petitioner is not W.P(C) No. 28433 of 2009 -2- entitled to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this court, in so far as the petitioner has not complied with the earlier direction of this court to remove the cable T.V. lines from the electric post. He further submits that even if this court is inclined to direct disposal of Ext.P6, the 2nd respondent is not the competent person to do so and it is the Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Neyyattinkara to consider and pass order on such representations. 3. Having heard both sides, I am of opinion that no harm would be caused if I direct Executive Engineer, Electrical Division, Neyyattinkara to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6. Accordingly, the said officer is directed to consider and pass order on Ext.P6, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. For this purpose, the 2nd respondent shall forward Ext.P6 to the said Executive Engineer. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs