IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 22831 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- SAIDU.A., S/O.LATE MUHAMMED ALUNGAL, KUTTIPALA, PULLIPARAMB.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION OFFICER, KADALUNDY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE SECRETARY, CHELAMPRA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHELAMBRA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22831 OF 2009 (Y) ===================== Dated this the 11th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner states that he is the owner and occupier of 24.85 cents of land in Re.Sy.No.108/1 of Chelambra Village. 2. According to the petitioner, reclaiming the land, he has constructed a residential house. According to the petitioner, in order to avail supply of energy, he applied for building number and that was not assigned by the 2nd respondent. Therefore he moved the 4th respondent by filing Ext.P6. It is stated that on Ext.P6, the District Collector has given an endorsement to the 2nd respondent to the effect that in the light of the latest circular, there is nothing irregular in assigning building number to the building constructed by the petitioner. 3. Petitioner submits that inspite of it, the Panchayat has not assigned building number and on the other hand, by Ext.P8, the 2nd respondent has again sought clarification from the 4th respondent. It is stated that the request of the petitioner is thus kept pending and for want of building number, he is not in a position to avail of supply of electricity from the 1st respondent. It WPC 22831/09 :2 : is with this complaint the writ petition is filed. 4. The Regulations framed by the Kerala State Electricity Board requires that the building in respect of which application for supply of electrical energy is made should have a number. If that be so, I cannot find fault with the 1st respondent in not supplying energy to the premises of the petitioner for that reason. 5. As already noticed, the endorsement made by the 4th respondent in Ext.P6 shows that according to the 4th respondent, the building number can be assigned to the building in question. If that be so, there is no reason why the 2nd respondent should not assign number to the building constructed by the petitioner so that the petitioner can eventually take up the matter with the 1st respondent and avail of supply of electrical energy. 6. Having regard to the facts, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions. (1) That on the production of a copy of this judgment, the 2nd respondent to whom Ext.P6 has been addressed, shall take a decision of Ext.P6 in the light of the endorsement made by the 4th respondent. (2) Once a decision is taken as above and number has WPC 22831/09 :3 : been assigned to the building, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent, who shall immediately take a decision on the application made by the petitioner for supply of electrical energy. (3) Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before respondents 1 and 2 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp