IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 5TH MAY 2009 / 15TH VAISAKHA 1931 WP(C).No. 13106 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.SADASIVAN NADAR, S/O.LATE APPIYAN NADAR, BABY NIVAS, THIRUVALLOM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VAIDUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THIRUVALLOM DIVISION, K.S.E.B, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KOMALAN, S/O.CHANDRANANDAN, MUDIPPURA VILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KATTACHALKUZHI DESOM, VENGANOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ANIL KUMAR, S/O. GOVINDAN, BABA NILAYAM, UDANIYOOR DESOM, KALLIYOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, PANAVILA VEEDU, KOTTUKKAL DESOM, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI. P.P. THAJUDEEN, STANDING COUNSEL FOR KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ----------------------------------- W.P(C) No. 13106 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the steps taken by the respondents 3 to 5 to run a toddy shop in an unauthorised shed constructed on the National Highway margin, making use of the building belong to the petitioner where the said respondents were permitted to run the toddy shop earlier. The petitioner submits that no consent has been given for running the said business in the petitioner's building as on date. The case of the petitioner is that the respondents 3 to 5 have already drawn electricity connection unauthorisedly to the shed, from the building belonging to the petitioner which hence has been brought to the notice of the departmental authorities. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances, the matter is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P3 representation preferred by the petitioner in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner and also the respondents 3 to 5, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE vkm