IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WA.No. 1307 of 2007() --------------------- {IN WPC.14626/2007 OF THIS COURT} .................... APPELLANT(S): 1ST PETITIONER ----------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, ANTHIKATTU HOUSE, KOONAMMAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.ASWAS SRI.ANIL KUMAR SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 AND PETITIONERS 2 TO 6 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE ADDL.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP.BY CHAIRMAN, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WA.No. 1307 of 2007 :: 2 :: 5. THE ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KSEB, SUB STATION SUB DIVISION, KURUMASSERY. 6. SEBASTIAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, ANTHIKATTU HOUSE, KOONAMMAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM. 7. THOMAS, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, ANTHIKATTU HOUSE, KOONAMMAVU P.O., ERNAKULAM. 8. K.M.RAJENDRA PAI, AGED 44 YEARS, KALAPARAMBATH, THEVARKAD, VARAPUZHA. 9. SHINY JOMY, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O.JOMY, CHANDANAPARAMBIL, THEVARKAD, VARAPUZHA. 10. BABY KARIKASSERY, AGED 40 YEARS, PUTHENPALLY, VARAPUZHA. R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB R6 TO 10 BY SRI.JOE KALLIATH R1 TO 3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. KOSHY, Ag.C.J. & V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.A.No.1307 of 2007 ------------------------- Dated this the 23th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Koshy, Ag.C.J. The appellant is challenging the drawal of 33 kv electric line as per the order of the Additional District Magistrate. According to the appellant, the above line was drawn against the proposal of the Board (Ext.P8) and it is also contended that despite the interim order, line was drawn during the pendency of the writ petition. The learned single Judge stated that the appellant can file a petition for shifting the line. The effect of the judgment is that the appellant can approach the Additional District Magistrate for shifting of the line and if an application is filed in that regard, it shall be considered untrammeled by the observations in the impugned order and in the impugned judgment. Appeal is disposed of as above. Sd/- (J.B. KOSHY) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge