IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2009 / 13TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 25387 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. D.PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 55 YEARS, SON OF P.V.DAMODARAN, NEETHA NIVAS, VALAMANGALAM NORTH, THURAVOOR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. I.V.MANOJNA, AGED 50 YEARS, WIFE OF D.PURUSHOTHAMAN, NEETHA NIVAS, VALAMANGALAM NORTH, THURAVOOR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.H.B.SHENOY SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SMT.LAKSHMI B.SHENOY SRI.ABU MATHEW SRI.SOBHAN GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, PATTANAKKAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. K.R.CHANDRABABU, KALARICKAL, VALAMANGALAM, THURAVOOR P.O., CHERTHALA. 4. SREEDHARAN, KALARIKKAL, VALAMANGALAM, THURAVOOR P.O., CHERTHALA. G.P. SHRI.MUHAMMED HASHIM ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.25387 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 5th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are challenging Ext.P6 order passed by the 1st respondent under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act giving permission to the 2nd respondent draw electricity line over the property of the petitioners for giving electricity connection to the 3rd respondent's house. One of the contentions raised by the petitioners is that the 2nd petitioner was not heard before passing Ext.P6 order. They have a further contention that the 1st petitioner had suggested three alternate routes, feasibility of which has not been considered by the 1st respondent while passing Ext.P6 order. 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the KSEB also. He does not dispute the fact that the 2nd petitioner was not heard before passing Ext.P6 order. 3. In the above circumstances, Ext.P6 has been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice in so far as the 2nd petitioner is concerned. Accordingly, Ext.P6 is quashed. The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the matter after issuing notice to all concerned including the petitioners and pass fresh orders as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. While doing so, the 1st respondent shall consider the feasibility of the alternate routes suggested by the petitioners. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2