IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2009 / 24TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 18105 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHEELA B., W/O.AJAYAKUMAR, VARAMBEL PADINJATTATHIL, NENMENI MUNROE THURUTHU P.O., KOLLAM 691 502. BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM. 2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KUNDARA, KOLLAM. 4. SHAMLA KUMARI, PALATHINKADA VEEDU, NENMENI MUNROE THURUTHU P.O., KOLLAM 691 502. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 & R3 SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18105 of 2009(G) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 5.5.2009 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND, AJAYAKUMAR EXT.P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 15.5.2009 ISSUED BYTHE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUNROE THURUTHU VILLAGE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND, AJAYAKUMAR. EXT.P3 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE AREA DATED NIL. EXT.P4 - A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 8.6.2009 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.6.2009 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 18105 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 16th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of a property through which the 1st respondent has permitted the 3rd respondent to draw electric lines, for supply of electricity to the 4th respondent. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the 1st respondent permitting the 3rd respondent to draw the electric lines. Today when the matter was taken up, the learned standing counsel for the electricity board submits that lines can be drawn beneath a 11 KV line already existing, without crossing the petitioner’s property. This is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of directing that the line shall be drawn through the route now suggested by the standing counsel, without crossing the petitioner’s property. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs