IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1942 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.23677/2009 DATED19.8.2009 .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER ------------------------ ABDUL JABBAR,AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. SYED MOHAMMED, THEKKEMAVUMKAMANNIL HOUSE, KATTOOR MURI, NARANGANAM NORTH P.O. CHERUKOLE VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE ADDL.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVION, KOZENCHERRY. 3. HANEEFA AGED 60 YEARS, KOLLAKADVUPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE, KATTOOR MURI, NARANGANAM NORTH P.O. CHERUKOLE VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATNANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. SALEENA,W/O.HANEEFA, AGED 60 YEARS, KOLLAKADVUPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE, KATTOOR MURI, NARANGANAM NORTH P.O., CHERUKOLE VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. GEORGE MECHERIL R2 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI. P.P THAJUDEEN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jma C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ ---------------------------------------------------- W.A No. 1942 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair , J The appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to accept the appellant's contentions that the electric line should not be drawn over the route approved by the ADM vide Ext.P4. Even though the contention raised by the counsel that the alternate route suggested by him, if caused lesser inconvenience to the land owners including the appellant, the same, should be chosen is acceptable. However, from Ext.P4 it is noticed that is the land through which the line is approved is a pathway. Appellant's counsel submitted that the ownership of the land over which the pathway is maintained, is in dispute. This Court has taken a consistent view that the electric line over the private property should be drawn causing least inconvenience to least number of land owners. Pathway irrespective of ownership is used by people to walk over the W.A No. 1942/2009 : 2 : same and by retaining electric line over the same property, the ownership of the pathway or the right of use are not affected. So much so, we do not find any merit in this appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, if any road or any other wider pathway is available to the consumers, the appellant can apply for shifting of the line after a demonstration through a sketch as to how the line proposed by him cause lesser inconvenience to lesser number of owners. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR (Judge) K. VINOD CHANDRAN (Judge) jma