IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 W.A.No.1964 of 2008 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).17196/2008-V, DATED 08/08/2008 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENT 4 & 5:- ----------------------------------------------------- 1. NARAYANAN NAIR, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, PANICKAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MAROOR, MALLASSERY P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. V. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, GEETHA BHAVAN, MAROOR, MALLASSERY POST - 689646, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.RANJITH SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. R. KUNJIKRISHNAN NAIR, S/O. LATE RAMAN PILLAI, PANICKAKUZHY HOUSE, PRAMADOM VILLAGE, MALLASSERY POST, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA. W.A.NO.1964 OF 2008 - 2 - 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR, SRI.K.S.BABU, SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW. R2 & R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA. R4 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.Dattu, C.J. & A.K.Basheer, J. --------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1964 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 15th October, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu,C.J. Respondents 4 and 5 in the writ petition are the appellants in this Writ Appeal. They are aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.17196 of 2008 dated 8th August, 2008. Therefore, they are before us in this appeal. (2) Respondents 4 and 5 had filed an application before the Additional District Magistrate, Pathanamthitta, for shifting of electric line passing through their property for supply of electrical energy to the writ petitioner's property. The Additional District Magistrate, by invoking his powers under Section 17 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (“Act” for short), has granted the reliefs sought for by respondents 4 and 5. It is that order which had been called in question by the petitioner before this Court. (3) Admittedly, the petitioner in the writ petition was a consumer of electrical energy supplied by the 3rd respondent in the writ petition for more than four decades. For supply of electrical energy to the petitioner's property, the electric lines were drawn by the officers of the Kerala State Electricity Board through the property of respondents 4 and 5. As W.A.No.1964 of 2008 - 2 - we have already stated, it is respondents 4 and 5 had approached the Additional District Magistrate to invoke his powers under Section 17 of the Act and to shift the electric lines to the property of the writ petitioner. (4) The learned Single Judge is of the opinion, that, Section 17 of the Act would not authorize the Additional District Magistrate to pass the impugned order (Exhibit P4, dated 26.05.2008). To come to that conclusion, the learned Single Judge, in our opinion, has placed proper construction. It is the correctness or otherwise of the said order is the subject matter of this Writ Appeal. (5) Section 17 of the Act reads as under: “17. Removal or alteration of telegraph line or post, on property other than that of a local authority.- (1) When, under the foregoing provisions of this Act, a telegraph line or post has been placed by the telegraph authority under, over, along, across, in or upon any property, not being property vested in or under the control or management of a local authority, and any person entitled to do so desires to deal with that property in such a manner as to render it necessary or convenient that the telegraph line or post should be removed to another part thereof or to a higher or lower level or altered in from, he may require the telegraph authority to remove or alter the line of post accordingly: Provided that, if compensation has been paid under section 10, clause (d), he shall, when making the requisition, tender to the telegraph authority the amount requisite to defray W.A.No.1964 of 2008 - 3 - the expense of the removal or alteration, or half of the amount paid as compensation, whichever may be the smaller sum. (2) If the telegraph authority omits to comply with the requisition, the person making it may apply to the District Magistrate within whose jurisdiction the property is situate to order the removal or alteration. (3) A District Magistrate receiving an application under sub-section (2) may, in his discretion, reject the same or make an order, absolutely or subject to conditions, for the removal of the telegraph line or post to any other part of the property or to a higher or lower level or for the alteration of its form; and the order so made shall be final”. (6) A plain reading of Section 17 of the Act would make it clear that the telegraph lines/electric lines can be shifted within that property where the electric lines have been drawn and it cannot be shifted to yet another property which may or may not belong to the persons concerned. The learned Single Judge, being of the opinion that the invocation of powers by the Additional District Magistrate is contrary to the provisions of the Act, has, in our opinion, rightly, quashed Exhibit P4 order passed by the Additional District Magistrate. Having gone through the orders passed by the learned Single Judge carefully and also having given our anxious consideration to the construction placed on Section 17 of the Act, we do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, which would call for our W.A.No.1964 of 2008 - 4 - interference in appeal. Therefore, the Writ Appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice A.K.Basheer vku/- Judge