IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2010 / 29TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24735 of 2010(N) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. INDUS TOWERS LIMITED REPRESENTED BY DULY AUTHORISED HEAD (LEGAL), PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR M.N., 8TH FLOOR, VANKARATH TOWERS, N.H BYPASS, PADIVATTOM, KOCHI - 682 024. 2. BHARATHI INFRATEL LIMITED., REPRESENTED BY MR.PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR M.N., N.H BYPASS, KUNDANNOOR, MARADU, KOCHI - 682 304. 3. IDEA CELLULAR LTD., REPRESENTED BY MR.PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR M.N., MERCY ESTATE, IIND FLOOR, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI - 682 015. BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BOARD SECRETARIAT, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, GANDHI NAGAR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 008. 4. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, POONJAR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 581. R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 24735 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2010 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of satisfying all the requirements as stipulated by the Board so as to have the additional power allocation in respect of two different consumer Nos. 8689 and 5981 and despite preferring Exts.P8 and P8(a) applications for extending necessary relief, the matter is still being kept in cold storage for nearly 12 months, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present Writ Petition for appropriate relief. 2. The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 submits that, with regard to the consumer No.5981 forming the subject matter of Ext.P8(a), the petitioner has satisfied the requirements and installation of the 'transformer' of requisite capacity and drawing of the lines require some more time and there is absolutely no lapse or negligence in this regard. 3. With regard to the consumer No.8689, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner is still to satisfy the 'OYEC' charges for installation of the transformer, which is necessary, so as to extend the relief. The learned counsel further submits that the actual requirements to be satisfied by this petitioner will be intimated in writing within two weeks 2 WP(C) No. 24735/2010 and on satisfaction of the requirements, the matter will be positively dealt with without any delay. 4. After hearing both the sides, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to inform the particulars to be satisfied by the petitioner, so as to have the relief sought for. This shall be done within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of the communication as above, the petitioner to satisfy all the requirements stipulated, on which event, the matter shall be considered and finalized for extending the necessary relief within a further period of three months. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc