IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 5104 of 2009(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- V.K. PRADEEP, CHANNEL VISION CABLE,ROOM NO.19, TOWN BAZAR, OLD PRIVATE BUS STAND, ALUVA - 683 101. BY ADV. SRI.LIFFY P. FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KSEB, ALUVA. 3. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, ALUVA, TOWN. 4. DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KSEB, VYTTILA. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 5104 of 2009-G ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 26th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The prayers in the writ petition are as follows: “1). to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to draw optical fibre cables through 109 electrical applied for by the petitioner in the electrical division of Aluva. ii). to direct the respondents not to dismantle, damage or destroy any of the cables drawn by the petitioner through the 340 electric poles in the electrical Division of Aluva. iii) to direct the respondent to consider Exhibit P2 application filed by the petitioner expeditiously and grant permission to the petitioner.” 2. According to the petitioner, he has invested huge amounts and drawn optical fibre cables through about 109 electric poles. It is his case that there is not even an application for drawing optical fibre cable WPC No. 5104/2009 -2- through those poles submitted by anyone. It is stated that the petitioner started his cable TV net work in 2008 and is using mainly optical fibre cable. He made Ext.P2 application dated 29.9.2008. He obtained Ext.P3 licence from Aluva Municipality. According to him, he approached the 2nd respondent for orders to draw optical fibre through poles. Now, the petitioner is issued with Ext.P6 dated 3.2.2009 to remove the cable TV lines drawn through KSEB poles on the basis of the interim order of the learned Single Judge of this court. 2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the K.S.E.B. Learned standing counsel submits that the judgment referred in Ext.P6 is obtained by M/S.Asianet Satellite Communication and by the said judgment this court had directed action to be taken for dismantling of unauthorised cables drawn over the poles allotted to Asianet Satellite Communication Ltd. The action is only WPC No. 5104/2009 -3- pursuant to the said judgment. 3. I do not see how Ext.P6 can be attacked. It is done pursuant to the judgment of this court. At any rate, there is no challenge to Ext.P6. Of course, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are cables over poles which are not allotted to any one. Learned standing counsel points out that Ext.P2 is filed before the Divisional Engineer, K.S.E.B, Town Section, Alwaye and that there is no such officer. If the line has been drawn by the petitioner over the poles which have not been allotted to any one, it is for the petitioner to bring it to the notice of the 2nd respondent. Without prejudice to the said right, the writ petition is dismissed. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. MS