IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2010 / 8TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2064 of 2010(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MATHEW THOMAS, S/O.MATHEW, YOGIA VEEDU, MANNANCHERRY MURI, MANNANCHERRY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.P.BINNY JOSEPH SRI.T.RAJESH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB MUHAMMA, MUHAMMA ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. N.SUBASH, PADASSERYIL HOUSE, MANNANCHERRY, AMBALAPUZHA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ----------------------------- W.P(C) No.2064 of 2010-G ------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved of the steps being taken by the second respondent for shifting the electrical line through the petitioner’s property. It is case of the petitioner that the third respondent has presently constructed a new residential building without leaving sufficient open space, which allegedly necessitated shifting of the electrical line passing through the southern boundary, which the third respondent is sharing with the petitioner’s property. 2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Board submits that, pursuant to the compliant preferred by the third respondent, the first respondent who is the statutory authority has sought for a report from the second respondent and the second respondent has submitted three proposals with regard to the issue involved. W.P(C) No.2064 of 2010-G 2 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the matter could be finalized after considering the proposals and also after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the third respondent. 4. Accordingly the first respondent is directed to consider the matter afresh in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and the third respondent, which shall be finalized at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab