IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 25574 of 2011(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SOSAMMA MATHEW, PETTAYIL NEDIYUZHATHIL, THUMPAMON, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. BY ADVS. SRI. THAMPAN THOMAS SRI. B.V. JOY SANKAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 001. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 501. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 501. 4. V.K. MATHEW, VATTOLLIYIL HOUSE, THUMPAMON.P.O., PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, DISTRICT-680 501. 5. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-685 516. R1 & R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. G. GOPAKUMAR R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI. SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSEB R4 BY ADVS. SRI.V. PHILIP MATHEW SRI. JOSEPH RONY JOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VPV WPCNO.25574/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SKETCH (EXHIBIT P-5 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6748 OF 2011 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT). EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.6748 OF 2011 DATED 11.03.2011. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTICE BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 7.6.2011. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.09.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R4(A): COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE VPV P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 25574 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P6 order dated 17.9.2011 issued by the Additional District Magistrate under section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act is under challenge in this writ petition. By that order, the Additional District Magistrate permitted respondents 2 and 3 to shift the 11 KV line presently passing through the property of the fourth respondent along the route 'ABS' through the public road along the route 'PQRS'. Though posts are proposed to be erected in the public road, a stay wire is required to be erected in the land belonging to the petitioner and hence this writ petition. 2. Respondents 2 and 3 have in their counter affidavit stated that the line can be drawn through the modified route 'PQRS' by shifting the location of the post 'Q' to the opposite side of the road passing along the boundary of the petitioner's land. It is stated that for that purpose, the consent of Sri.P.T.Varghese was required and it has been obtained. It is also stated that for effecting the change, the person seeking the shifting will have to spend additional amounts which will have to be determined and communicated in due course. The learned counsel for the petitioner or the learned counsel WPC No.25574/2011 2 appearing for the fourth respondent did not oppose the said suggestion. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to shift the 11KV electricity line presently passing though the fourth respondent's property in the manner suggested in Ext.R1(c) sketch along the route 'PQRS' after shifting the post 'Q' to the opposite side of the road. Needless to say, if any additional amount is required to be deposited, the petitioner shall deposit the said sum on being intimated. The line shall be shifted within two weeks from the date on which the additional amount required to be deposited is deposited by the petitioner. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.25574/2011 3