IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 25495 of 2009(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MADHUKUMAR, LAKSHMI SADANAM, ELAMKAKKARA PO, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-26, REP.BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER M.CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, LAKSHMI SADANAM, ELAMAKKARA, PO, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-26. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. J.Y.JOSEPH, CHOOTHAPARAMBIL, ATHANI, KEEREZHIMALA PO, KUSUMAGIRI. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION,KSEB, VYTTILA. 3. THE ADDL.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 G.P. SHRI.MUHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 25495/09. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.24.8.09 OF R3. P2. COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.25495 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of 10 cents of land in Sy.No.341/1 (Re.Sy.No.641/14) of Kakkanadu Village in Kanayannur Taluk. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that by Ext.P1 order the Additional District Magistrate has permitted the 2nd respondent to draw electric line through the petitioner's property without obtaining consent from the petitioner and without hearing him. I directed the Government Pleader to ascertain whether before passing Ext.P1 order notice was issued to the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader submits that from the records it is not seen that notice has been issued to the petitioner, but notice has been issued to Sri.Johnson who was the erstwhile owner of the property. The counsel for the petitioner hands over copy of the sale deed by which the petitioner purchased the land. The date shown therein is 21.2.2007. It is also seen that the name of the vendor shown therein is John and not Johnson. From the documents it is clear that the petitioner purchased the land in 21.2.2007. That being so, clearly the Additional District Magistrate could not have passed the impugned order without issuing notice to the petitioner and hearing him. Having not done so, the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate is in violation of the principles of 2 natural justice. Accordingly, Ext.P1 is quashed. The 3rd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after issuing notice to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge