IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 23058 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MADHU BHASKARAN, S/O.BHASKARAN, PARAMBEL, MUTTUKADU, BYSON VALLEY, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SCARIA, S/O.CHACKO, MANGALATHU HOUSE, MUTTUKADU, BYSON VALLEY, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ELECTRICAL SECTION, CHITHIRAPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI, EXERCISING POWER AS THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, IDUKKI. ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R1,2 GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 23058 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 9th September, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioners apprehend drawing of electric line through the petitioners' property and therefore seek the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 & 2 not to draw the 11 KV line from Muttukadu to Naduppara S C Colony through the petitioners properties without adopting the procedures laid down in the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Works of Licences Rules, 2006. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to consider Ext. P2 representation along with the case in Ext. P1 judgment and dispose of the same on merits with notices to the petitioners.” 2. In respect of the same line, there is an earlier judgment Ext. P1 wherein it is stated thus: “Petitioner has approached this Court feeling aggrieved by the proposal to draw electric line. Today, when the matter came up, it is submitted by the learned standing counsel for the respondent Electricity Board that the line is proposed to be drawn through a public pathway. If it is drawn through a public pathway, I do not see how the petitioner can raise a complaint that unless permission is obtained from the Magistrate under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, the line cannot be drawn. In such circumstances, I record the submission of the learned standing counsel that the line is proposed to be drawn through a public pathway and not through any private pathway. Needless to say, if the line is proposed to be drawn through any portion of the property of the petitioner, it can be done only after getting permission under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act.” That being so, if the Electricity Board wants to draw line through the petitioners' property, they have necessarily to obtain sanction from W.P.C. No. 23058/09 -: 2 :- the District Magistrate as laid down in that judgment. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition in terms of Ext. P1 judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.