IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 20TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4167 of 2011(U) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. INDHU, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O.BABU, KORANKATH HOUSE, ASHTAMICHIRA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. KUNJUKUTTI AMMA, D/O.KUNJIKAVU AMMA, MANGARI HOUSE, MURIKINGAL P.O., PUTHANOLI, NOW RESIDING AT THOTTIPPAL P.O., NEDUMBAL DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.RAJITHA.R. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR.PIN- 680 001 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICITY SUB DIVISION, K.S.E.B., CHALAKKUDY.PIN- 680 307 3. RADHA, W/O.APPU, KALAPURAKKAL HOUSE, PUTHANOLI, MURIKINGAL P.O., THRISSUR.680 699 4. NANIKUTTY AMMA, D/O.KUNJIKAVU AMMA, MANGARI HOUSE, PUTHANOLI, MURIK INGAL P.O., THRISSUR.680 699 5. VENU, S/O.NARAYANI AMMA, MANGARI HOUSE, PUTHANOLI, MURIKKINGAL P.O., THRISSUR.680 699 6. SAJITHA, W/O.BHARATHAN, MANGARI HOUSE, MURIKKINGAL P.O., THRISSUR.PIN- 680 699 sts WP(C)NO.4167/2011 7. RADHA, D/O.NARAYANI AMMA, MANGARI HOUSE, MURIKKINGAL P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.PIN- 680 699 8. VIJAYAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, K.S.E.B., VELLIKULANGARA, THRISSUR.680 001 R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 4167 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P4 order passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Thrissur permitting the Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board' for short) to draw electricity line through a pathway to provide electricity connection to the residence of the third respondent is under challenge in this writ petition. By the impugned order, the Additional District Magistrate permitted the Board to draw the electricity line through a pathway having a width of three metres. The order states that erection of posts along the boundary of the pathway will not cause obstruction to vehicular traffic along the pathway. The petitioners do not dispute the entitlement of the beneficiary to make use of the pathway to draw electricity line. Their only grievance is that the alternate route suggested by them should have accepted. The Additional District Magistrate has in Ext.P4 given the reason why the said alternate route cannot be accepted. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioners have not made out a case warranting interference with the impugned order. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No./2011 2 WPC No./2011 3