IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17723 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SAIDH MUHAMMED, AGED 52, S/O.IBRAHIM, PUTHIYA VEETIL (HOUSE), CHATHAKULAM, PATTIKAD (POST). 2. SEBIL P.S., S/O.SAIDH MUHAMMED, PUTHIYA VEETIL (HOUSE), CHATHAKULAM, PATTIKAD (POST). BY ADV. SRI.C.A.ANOOP RESPONDENTS ------------ 1. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR. 2. ASST.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, MANNUTHI. 3. DESAN, S/O.KOCHUMON, ARIKAL(HOUSE), CHATHAKULAM PATTIKAD (DISTRICT). 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 AND R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHANDRAN R2 BY ADV. MR. P.P. THAJUDHEEN, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 17723 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 11th June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are stated as aggrieved of the steps being taken by the respondents to draw electric line so as to provide electric connection to the third respondent. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a Civil Suit as O.S.No. 2873 of 2007 pending before the Munsiff's Court, Thrissur filed by the third respondent claiming easement right over the property belonging to the petitioners. It was in the meanwhile that steps were being pursued to cause electric line to be drawn through the property of the petitioners, which is not correct or proper, submits the learned Counsel. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Board submits that the Board is not a party to the Civil Suit and that the officers of the Board are not aware of such proceedings. It is also submitted that there is an electric line passing through the property of the petitioners and that when steps were taken to draw the electric line to give connection to the third respondent, the same was objected by the petitioners, pursuant to which the matter was referred to the ADM/statutory authority. It is also W.P.(C) No. 17723 OF 2010 2 stated that the matter will be pursued only subject to the orders to be passed by the first respondent in the above proceedings. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well 4. Considering the facts and circumstances and the limited extent of relief proposed to be given, this Court does not propose to issue notice to the third respondent for the time being. Taking note of the submission that the ADM has already conducted a site inspection yesterday, the first respondent is directed to consider the matter and finalise the same, in accordance with law, after hearing all the parties concerned. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the da te of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is made clear that drawal of the electric line will be subject to the orders to be passed by the first respondent as above. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk