IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2009 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WA.No. 2355 of 2009 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.27061/2009 DATED 7.10.2009 .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.6 ---------------------------------------------- AJITHA, W/O. RAJAN, KOTTOOR HOUSE, KUTTOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5, 7 & 8 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MEENAKSHI, CHALIL PALERI, KUTTOOR, KUTTOOR P.O., KANNUR. 2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, PAZHAYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. CHERIYAKUTTY, KANJIRANGADAN VEEDU, KUTTOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 6. PARVATHI, W/O. NARAYANAN, KOTTOOR HOUSE, KUTTOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 7. PRASEETHA, W/O. SANTHOSH, ALELATHU POYIL HOUSE, KUTTOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 8. M.RAJASHEKHARAN NAIR, MANIMALAKAROTHU, NELLIYAADU, KUTTOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM GEORGE JACOB R2 & R4 BY SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.2355 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT A.K.Basheer, J. Ext.P2 order passed by the Additional District Magistrate under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 was challenged by respondent No.1 herein before the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.27061 of 2009. 2. The learned Single Judge interfered with the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate on the ground that the alternate route suggested by the writ petitioner (respondent No.1) for drawal of the electric line is more feasible. Accordingly Ext.P2 was quashed and the writ petition was disposed of directing the Assistant Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, Pazhayangadi to draw the electric line through the pathway indicated in Ext.P1 sketch produced by the writ petitioner. It was made clear that it would be open to the Board to install “another post opposite to the one shown as 'B' on the road instead of drawing the line from the post at point 'A'”. W.A.No.2355 of 2009. - 2 - 3. The above order of the learned Single Judge is impugned in this writ appeal by respondent No.6 in the writ petition. 4. When this writ appeal came up for admission, we directed the learned Standing Counsel for the Board to get instructions in the matter. A statement has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel in which the view taken by the Board before the Additional District Magistrate has been reiterated. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No.1 also. The appellant and respondent No.1 have produced additional documents in support of their respective contentions. 5. We have carefully perused Ext.P2 order and the materials now placed before us by the contesting parties. It is discernible from the contention now raised before us by the parties that certain aspects which were not brought in to focus before the Additional District Magistrate are now before us. We do not propose to refer to or deal with them at this stage. 6. In our view, it will be in the fitness of things and in the better interest of the parties, to set aside Ext.P2 order and direct the W.A.No.2355 of 2009. - 3 - Additional District Magistrate (respondent No.3) to reconsider the entire matter afresh in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 7. It shall be ensured by the said authority that all the parties are given adequate opportunity to advance their case and produce additional documents, if they choose to do so. Respondent No.7 who had appeared before the Additional Magistrate shall also be served with notice and given an opportunity to be heard. Respondent No.3 shall pass orders in the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ appeal is disposed of in the above terms. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns