IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 29TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 26284 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- TOM T.JOSEPH, DIRECTOR, VISVESWARAYA INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, MATTAKARA, P.O.,KARIMPANI, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 685 001. 2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KSEB, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, PALLAM, KOTTAYAM – 682 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B, ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, MANARCAD, KOTTAYAM – 682 001. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KSEB, ELECTRICAL SECTION, AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM – 682 236. 5. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM – 682 001. 6. SRI.AUGUSTINE, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KSEB, ELECTRICAL SECTION, AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM – 682 236. W.P.(C). NO.26284/2010-I: *ADDL. 7TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED: 7. THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, M/S. AIRTEL TELECOMMUNICATIONS LTD., MATTAKKARA, KARIMPANI.P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686 564. *IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL 7TH RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.C. AS PER ORDER DATED 20/08/10 IN I.A. 11897/10. R1 TO R4 BY SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B, R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.M. MANOJ. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.26284 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 20th September, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the Director of an educational institution, namely, Visveswarayya Institute of Engineering Technology. The petitioner is aggrieved by the installation of a Transformer in such a manner to cause hindrance to the functioning of the College besides its further prospects. It was installed for granting power allocation to one mobile tower belonging to the additional 7th respondent. Obviously, the grievance of the petitioner is with respect to the location wherein the said Transformer was installed. Pointing out the inconvenience and the necessity to shift the Transformer to another convenient place, the petitioner has already submitted Ext.P8 representation before the third respondent. Admittedly, the same is pending. The third respondent is competent to look into the grievances raised as per Ext.P8. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 with notice to the petitioner as also to the additional 7th respondent expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS