IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18760 of 2010(T) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ RUGMANI W/O. LATE BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 85 YEARS, CHADAYANKALAYIL KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD DIST. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER M.R.SREEDHARAN S/O. M.V.RAMAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT CHADAYANKALAYIL, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, K.S.E.B., KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KSEB, PALAKKAD. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P. P.THAJUDEEN, SC R2 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 18760 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court for directing the first respondent, not to draw the HT line over the property of the petitioner without causing the dispute/objection preferred by the petitioner as borne by Ext.P2 referred to the 3rd respondent for adjudication. 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st and 2nd respondents submits that, the neighbour of the petitioner by name one Manikandan has filed a petition for shifting the 11 KV electric line; pursuant to which an inspection was conducted by the 1st respondent at the spot. In the course of such inspection, it was revealed that there was some property dispute, particularly with regard to the pathway. This being the position, no final decision has been taken and that the request to shift the line and further action will be pursued only after issuing proper notice to all the parties concerned. After considering the same if it is found there is a cause to be referred to the adjudication to the 3rd respondent such course will be taken to have an adjudication under the relevant provisions of law. In the light of above submissions, this Court finds that no further orders are necessary. The Writ Petition is closed recording the submissions as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc