Gowri vs The Assistant Executive Engineer on 3 December, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30511 of 2009(H)


1. GOWRI, W/O.DIVAKARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :03/12/2009

 O R D E R
                                S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
                        ==================
                         W.P.(C).No. 30511 of 2009
                        ==================
                  Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2009
                                J U D G M E N T

The petitioner applied for electricity connection. The line had to

be drawn through the adjacent properties owned by

Smt.Chandramathy Amma and Sri.Thulaseedharan Pillai. They

objected to such drawing of lines through their properties. The 1st

respondent moved the Additional District Magistrate under Section

16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act. The Additional District Magistrate

overruled the objections of other land owners and permitted the 1st

respondent to draw electric lines for giving electricity connection to the

petitioner through the properties of the objectors. However, on an

intimation received from those persons to the effect that an R.S.A. is

pending before the High Court in respect of a dispute between the said

persons and the petitioner, the Additional District Magistrate kept the

order on hold. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has

filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

“i) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to provide
service connection to the petitioner’s house forthwith;

ii) To grant such other relief as this Hon’ble Court deems just and
proper in the interest of justice with costs.”

2. On 9.11.2009 I passed the following order:

“The petitioner is an applicant for electricity connection. The
petitioner complains that in spite of completing all formalities, she is not
favoured with an electricity connection. Standing counsel for the
Electricity Board submits that although the Addl. District Magistrate had
by Ext.P1 order, overruled the objections of two persons granting

2

permission to draw electricity line to the petitioner’s premises, those
objectors had informed the District Collector that in respect of the
property in question, a R.S.A. is pending before this Court. Therefore, the
District Collector has directed that Ext.P1 order be kept in abeyance.
Therefore, I direct the Government Pleader to get instructions as to why
the District Collector had kept Ext.P1 in abeyance simply because an
objector had informed the District Collector that a R.S.A. is pending in
respect of the dispute between the petitioner and the objectors in respect
of the property. For this purpose, the District Collector would stand suo
motu impleaded as additional respondent in the writ petition. The
petitioner shall furnish the Govt. Pleader with a copy of the writ petition.”

3. On 23.11.2009 I passed the following order:

“The Govt. Pleader submits that the District Magistrate on an
misunderstanding of the situation directed that Ext.P1 order be kept in
abeyance on receiving a legal notice from the 3rd party with whom the
beneficiary has some litigation pending in respect of the property in
question. It is submitted that now the correct position having been
intimated to the District Magistrate, he is taking further steps on the
same.

Post next week”

4. Today the learned Government Pleader submits that the

Additional District Magistrate has now withdrawn the letter dated

16.6.2009, by which, his earlier order was kept in abeyance and

therefore, the 1st respondent can go ahead with the drawing of lines in

accordance with the orders already passed. In the above

circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the

1st respondent draw electricity lines as permitted by the Additional

District Magistrate, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two

weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

sdk+                                                    S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
          ///True copy///

                                  P.A. to Judge

3