IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 9032 of 2008(A) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------- 1. K.C. ABDUL MUJEEB, SON OF SYEDALAVI HAJI KAVUNGAL CHENAKKAL HOUSE, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 2. K.C.RUKHIYA, WIFE OF SYEDALAVI HAJI KAVUNGAL CHENAKKAL HOUSE, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 3. M.K.BEERANKOYA HAJI, SON OF MUHAMMAD M.K.B. HOUSE, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 4. AYISHABI, DAUGHTER OF CHEEKUTTY MELAYI NEDUKKANDI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 5. E.P.SHAJI, SON OF THE LATE NARAYANAN ERAYAMBALATH PURAYI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 6. ABOOBACKER HAJI,SON OF THE LATE MUHAMMED MELAYI KUYYERI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 7. M.P.ABDULLAKUTTY, SON OF KUNHI POKER M.P.A. MANZIL, CHELUPADAM, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 8. M.N. ABDUL HAKKIM, SON OF MOIDEEN KUTTY MELAYI NEDUKKANDI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 9. VENNAKULANGARA KUTTAN, SON OF CHOYIKUTTY CHEENADATH VEEDU, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM 10. K.K.ABDUREHIMAN HAJI,SON OF MOIDEENKUTTY KUMMALI, NEDUKANDIYIL, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. WPC9032/08 - 2 - 11. KALIDASAN, SON OF KUNJUTTY KOCHAMPALLI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 12. K. VELAYUDHAN, SON OF K.SHANKARAN KARTHIKA, KOCHAMPILLI, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 13. V.SUBRAMANYAN, SON OF KUNHUTTY VENNATHODI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 14. BABURAJAN, SON OF CHOYIKUTTY VENNATHODI, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 15. E.P.KRISHNANKUTTY, SON OF NARAYANAN E.P. ERAYAMBALATHPURAYI, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 16. NARAYANI, WIFE OF PADMANABHAN MANADANKANDI VEEDU, CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 17. CHAKKIKUTTY, SON OF KANNAKUTTY NADUKKANDIPURAYI VEEDU, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 18. VELAYUDHAN, SON OF CHATHANKUTTY NADUKKANDIPURAYI VEEDU, CHELEMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM. 19. VELAYUDHAN, NADUKKANDIPURAYI CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. 20. N.P.CHATHANKUTTY, NADUKKANDIPURAYI CHELEMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.NIJOY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR MALAPPURAM. WPC9032/08 - 3 - 3. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (NALLALAM TRANSMISSION CIRCLE) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, NALLALAM. 5. CHELEMBRA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, CHELEMBRA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.ANU SIVARAMAN. R3 & R4 BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC FOR KSEB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.9032 of 2008-A = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT 1.The petitioners state that they are inhabitants of a scheduled caste colony. They object to the drawal of an electric line. The learned Standing Counsel for the KSE Board has placed before me a route map of alignment as certified by the Executive Engineer, Transmission Division, KSE Board. That route map shows that a 33 KV Line is proposed to be laid from KINFRA to Ramanattukara and the issue in hand relates to a very short lap very near to KINFRA. It is also submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the Board that 85% of the work has been completed. 2.The issue is shortly this. According to the petitioners, there is a public way to the KINFRA WP(C)9032/08 -: 2 :- and the line is drawn in such a way that it impairs the present user of that way. According to them, by the laying of poles aside the road, the width of the road as would be available for motorable purposes would be reduced. This is, in fact, the only issue raised. The petitioners have filed a complaint before the District Magistrate. But that by itself would not suffice because, the right of the petitioners is not on the basis of any obstruction that they make in relation to their private property. The width of the road through and for the purpose of a colony has to be maintained. That has to be ensured but if there are poles which are already existing, there is no reason why the 33 KV line should not be drawn utilizing the same poles or replacing those poles with better ones to support the 33 KV transmission line. This is primarily because, a 33 KV transmission line, even as stated by the Board, is not laid using towers but only poles. As a matter of fact, going by the scheme of the Electricity Act, 2003 and also its predecessor statutes, even WP(C)9032/08 -: 3 :- the Panchayat cannot object to such drawal of line because, the right of the Electricity Board, Telegraph Authority and the Water Authority to enter any land for the purpose of laying lines and placing equipments is statutorily conceded and the entitlement is only that in doing so, the least harm shall be done and compensation shall be paid for any loss caused. Therefore, even if any trees are cut or branches of trees are chopped and compensation is available, that may have to be paid but that does not mean that line cannot be drawn up. It is also not in the interest of the public at large to hold back the drawal of the line to KINFRA from Ramanattukara, the very purpose being to energise the KINFRA. 3.One Subramanyan had filed WP(C)6772/2008 stating that public interest is involved. The Division Bench had ultimately granted leave to withdraw that writ petition with liberty to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate reliefs. WP(C)9032/08 -: 4 :- 4.Having regard to what is aforesaid, the 4th respondent is directed to ensure that the drawal of the line in question shall be made in such a way that there shall be no obstruction to the passage of vehicles as is now available through the way in question. Any proceedings initiated before the District Magistrate will also be governed by these directions. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/