IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15265 of 2008(P)
1. GEORGE JACOB, RESIDING AT MUTHOOT HOUSE,
... Petitioner
2. GEORGE ALEXANDER, MUTHOOT HOUSE,
3. GEORGE THOMAS, MUTHOOT HOUSE,
4. M.G.GEORGE MUTHOOT, G 74, MUTHOOT HOUSE,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
4. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
5. AGASTHYA RESORTS & TOURS PRIVATE
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.VIJAYAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :23/05/2008
O R D E R
K.M. JOSEPH, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No. 15265 OF 2008 P
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking a
direction to quash Ext.P1 and all proceedings therein before
the 3rd respondent. Ext.P1 is a petition filed by the Assistant
Executive Engineer, Electrical Sub Division, Vizhinjam,
apparently under section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act,
1885. According to the petitioners, there is no jurisdiction with
the 3rd respondent to consider the matter. It is submitted that
there is an alternate route through the existing pathway and
that 5th respondent is owned by powerful persons. Ext.P1 is a
petition filed by the statutory authority under section 16(1) of
the Telegraph Act. I do not see how the petitioners can be
permitted to challenge Ext.P1. The petitioners can raise their
contentions before the 3rd respondent. At this stage, I feel
WPC.15265/08
: 2 :
that it cannot be open to the petitioners to raise any grievance
at all. Thus, leaving open the rights of the petitioners to raise
all the objections before the 3rd respondent, the writ petition is
disposed of.
(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)
aks