IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 35116 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SOMASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O. PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, SMITHAN, PIDAVOOR P.O., PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, PATHANAPURAM. 3. SMT. THEVI, MOOLAMKOTTU VEEDU, PIDAVOOR, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DIST. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR FOR R3 SRI.V.VARGHESE FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.T.K.MOHANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC.35116/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF ROUGH SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY. P2 COPY OF OBJECTION SUBMITTED BEFORE R1. P3 COPY OF ORDER OF R1 DT 15.11.08. P4 COPY OF REPORT OF TAHSILDAR DT 12.12.06. // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE K.M. JOSEPH, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 35116 OF 2008 E ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T I heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel and learned counsel appearing for the beneficiary(respondent No.3). Ext.P3 is the order of the Additional District Magistrate granting permission as proposed by KSEB. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that alternate route is not considered and there is no application of mind. Learned counsel for the beneficiary points out that the beneficiary has no objection in drawing line through the alternate route as proposed by the petitioner provided the petitioner meets the expenses proposed by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is yet another route(third proposal) passing through his property and he is ready to bear the expenses also. In the light of this submission, writ petition is disposed of as follows. Ext.P3 is quashed. The petitioner, the 3rd respondent or their representatives and the 2nd respondent shall be present before the 1st respondent on 20.4.2009. The 1st respondent will hear them WPC.35116/08 : 2 : and consider the third proposal of the petitioner and a decision will be taken by him on the same within two weeks from 20.4.2009. If the said route is acceptable, orders can be passed in accordance with law. If, however, it is found that the third proposal is not feasible, then, I take note of the contention of the petitioner that he will abide by the alternate proposal which he had proposed before the ADM and also that he will meet the expenses and orders will be passed on the said basis. (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE) aks