IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 36163 of 2010() ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUSAMMA JOSEPH,W/O.T.C.JOSEPH,AGED 77 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE,THARAMEL HOUSE, VATTAKOTTAL, KUMBANAD PO, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.RAMNATH SEI.M.VARGHESE VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA 689 645. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, VYDHYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,TRIVANDRUM 695 004. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION CONSTRUCTION SUB DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KOZHENCHERRY 689 641. 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KUMBANAD,THIRUVALLA 689 547. BY G.P.SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R1 ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2-R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.36163 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 22nd December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by the proposal on the part of respondents 2 to 4 to draw a 33 KV high tension electric line over the petitioner's property. Feeling aggrieved by the said proposal the petitioner has raised objections. Admittedly, the petitioner has already approached the first respondent raising his grievance against the aforesaid proposal. Besides the same, the petitioner has grievance regarding an existing 11 KV line which was drawn over her property. It is contended that instead of considering the grievances raised by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions under the Indian Telegraph Act, the first respondent has remitted the matter back to respondents 2 to 4. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned standing counsel. 3. In terms of the provisions under section 17 of the Indian Telegraph Act a person, aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the concerned competent telegraph authority on a complaint to alter or remove electric lines, is having a right to approach the concerned District Magistrate. However, a person who is aggrieved by the proposal to draw electric line has to raise his objection, if any, before the telegraph WP(C).No.36163/2010 2 authorities. Thereupon, the telegraph authorities have to approach the concerned District Magistrate to avert the obstruction and resistance in terms of the provisions under section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act and section 164 of the Indian Electricity Act. In view of the aforesaid position obtained in this case, this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to raise her grievance regarding the inaction on the part of respondents 2 to 4 to act upon her request for shifting or altering the existing 11 KV line before the first respondent. At the same time, the third respondent shall prefer a complaint in terms of the provisions under section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act read with section 164 of the Indian Electricity Act taking note of the objection raised by the petitioner against the proposal to draw a 33 KV line over her property. On receipt of the said complaint from the petitioner as also from the third respondent respectively on the aforesaid matters, the first respondent shall consider them jointly and a decision thereon shall be taken in accordance with law, after affording opportunities to respondents 2 to 4 and also to the petitioner. At any rate, this shall be done within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of such complaints. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // True copy // P.S. to Judge