IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2009 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 15315 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SHAJI MATHEW, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, PROPRIETOR, ASIAN NETWORK, FATHIMA BUILDING, CHUNGAM, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB DIVISION OFFICE, BALUSSERY. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, THAMARASSERY. 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION OFFICE, PUTHUPPADI. 5. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION OFFICE, KODANCHERY. 6. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION OFFICE, KODUVALLI. 7. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION OFFICE, OMASSERY. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R1 TO 7 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 15315 OF 2009 (H) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T Exts.P1 and P2 are agreements entered into by the petitioner with the respondents for drawing cables through poles. Petitioner states that anticipating sanction, he had drawn cables on certain poles, out of which 30 are remaining now. It is stated that in the meanwhile, the period of Exts.P1 and P2 expired and when he sought extension of the period, that was declined and the respondents are insisting that the cable laid through 30 poles mentioned above should be removed. It is at that stage the writ petition is filed praying that respondents be directed to regularise the 30 poles and thus to renew Exts.P1 and P2 agreements. 2. However, it is noticed that twice, on earlier occasions, petitioner had approached this Court on this very issue. Firstly, he filed WP(C) No.29234/08, which was disposed of by judgment dated 7/10/2008, giving him three weeks time to dismantle the cables. Again in WP(C) No.936/09, he was given two months more time. However, the time thus granted was not availed of and if so, this Court will not be justified in asking the respondents WPC 15315/09 :2 : to regularise the petitioner's action. 3. If that be so, this Court will not be justified in coming to the rescue of the petitioner on this occasion also. Therefore, the direction to the respondents to regularise the cables drawn through the 30 poles cannot be allowed. 4. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. Be that as it may, it will be open to the petitioner to move the respondents for renewal of the agreements, if he complies with their requirement by removing the cables laid unauthorisedly. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp