IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22136 of 2008(I) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SUSEELA.G, KARIKKOTTUKUZHI THALANIRA PUTHENVEEDU, CHEMBOOR, OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, TTRIVANDRUM RURAL, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE(RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, VELLARADA, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O THOLASI, PUTHUVAL VEEDU, CHEMBOOR, OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. W.P.(C).NO.22136/08 I 6. ROSAMMA @ VALLI, PUTHUVAL VEEDU, CHEMBOOR, OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SHRI P.P. THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB. R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI BEJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 22136 OF 2008 I -------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd July, 2008 JUDGMENT Case of the petitioner, in brief, is that she is the owner in possession of 43 cents of land which is planted with yielding rubber trees and it is the only source of income for her and her family, and that it is meant for construction of a residential building for her elder son. It is the further case of the petitioner that for giving electric connection to respondents 5 and 6, the line is going to be drawn through the property of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that 21 yielding rubber trees standing in her property will have to be cut down and removed, and that the petitioner has not given consent. Petitioner has also addressed a representation. Learned Government Pleader got instructions and submits that no proceedings are pending before the fourth respondent District Magistrate and no orders also have been passed. But, it is pointed out by the learned Government Pleader on instructions, that the authorities under WPC.22136/08 I 2 the Electricity Board will file an appropriate petition seeking permission under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act. In the light of the fact that the petitioner is resisting drawing of the line, only after getting permission under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, the line can be drawn. I do not see any need to issue notice to the party respondents. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not given any consent also. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing that if there is a proposal to draw the line across the property of the petitioner, in view of the resistance of the petitioner, the same can be done only after getting permission from the District Magistrate under Section 16 of the Act. Necessarily, the petitioner must be afforded an opportunity of being heard before any order is passed under the Section 16 of the Act. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy// PS to Judge WPC.22136/08 I 3