IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 29TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 5159 of 2011(T) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SMT.AMBUJAKSHY, W/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, PULLANIKKAL HOUSE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O., OLLUR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SRI SANKU, KALLEEPALAM HOUSE, KALLUKUZHI ROAD, EDAKUNNY VILLAGE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O., OLLUR, THRISSUR – 680 004. 2. SMT.AMMINI, W/O.DAMODARAN, OTTAKKATTIL HOUSE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O., OLLUR, THRISSUR – 680 004. 3. SMT.KALYANI, W/O.MOHANAN, PERINGALTHODY HOUSE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O., OLLUR, THRISSUR – 680 004. 4. SMT.THANKAMANI, W/O.VELAYUDHAN, THANGIL HOUSE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O., OLLUR, THRISSUR – 680 004. 5. SMT.LALITHA, W/O.RAJAN, NADUVIL HOUSE, KALLUKUZHI ROAD, EDAKUNNY VILLAGE, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O., OLLUR, THRISSUR – 680 004. 6. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, K.S.E.B., OLLUR, THRISSUR – 680 001. 7. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR – 680 001. R6 BY SRI. P.P. THAJUDHEEN, S.C, K.S.E.B. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 5159 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 order passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Thrissur permitting the sixth respondent to draw electricity line across her land to provide electricity connection to the residence of the fifth respondent herein. The sixth respondent had three proposals to give electricity connection to the fifth respondent. The petitioner and respondents 1 and 4 objected to the said three proposals. The sixth respondent thereupon moved the Additional District Magistrate, who issued notice to all the parties, considered their objections and permitted the Kerala State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board' for short) to draw the electricity line through the land belonging to the petitioner after noticing that it is the most feasible one. The petitioner challenges the said proposal mainly on the ground that if an electricity line is drawn through her lands, she will be disabled from putting up a construction in the said parcel of land. I am afraid there is no merit in the said contention. Ext.P1 the sketch produced by the petitioner herself discloses that the land belonging to the petitioner has an extent of 20 ½ cents and that the proposal is to draw weather proof overhead line along the western boundary of the land belonging to the petitioner. The petitioner cannot therefore be said to be really aggrieved. The next WPC No.5159/2011 2 contention put forward by the petitioner is that electricity connection can be given to the residence of the fifth respondent after the fourth respondent is given electricity connection as at that stage it would not be necessary to draw electricity line across petitioner’s lands. The said contention is also without any merit. The petitioner has not produced any material before me to show that the fourth respondent herein has applied for electricity connection or that the Board has taken steps to provide electricity connection to the fourth respondent. The petitioner cannot ask the beneficiary namely the fifth respondent herein to wait indefinitely till her neighbour gets electricity connection. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the challenge to Ext.P2 is without any merit. I accordingly hold that no grounds have been made out warranting interference with the impugned order. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.5159/2011 3 WPC No.5159/2011 4