IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 34765 of 2009(M)
1. ANITHA JAMAL, W/O.JAMAL, KOYALIPARAMBIL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERLA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD.REP.
... Respondent
2. THE ASST.ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION -
For Petitioner :SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN
For Respondent :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :14/12/2009
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 34765 of 2009
==================
Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the owner of a hall, where marriages and public
functions are held. The petitioner applied for an electricity connection
to the said building as early as on 23.5.2006. The hall is situated near
a transformer from which electricity connection can be provided to the
hall. The petitioner’s grievance is that although subsequent to the
application submitted by the petitioner, connections have been given
to many buildings from the same transformer, the petitioner has not
been given electricity connection so far. The petitioner, therefore,
seeks the following reliefs:
“i] A Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to act upon the
application for electricity connection submitted by the petitioner on
23.5.2006 forthwith.
ii] A Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide electric
connection to ‘Classic Durbar Hall’ owned by the petitioner
forthwith.”
2. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala
State Electricity Board submits that the petitioner’s power requirement
is 20 KWA and the petitioner has not submitted any application for
power allocation, which is a must in the case of power connection in
excess of 10 KWA. It is also submitted that now the present
transformer is overloaded and steps are afoot for establishing another
w.p.c.34765/09 2
transformer and if the petitioner by that time files an application for
power allocation as and when the new transformer is commissioned,
the petitioner’s request can be appropriately considered.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner points that it is
improper on the part of the Kerala State Electricity Board to sit on the
petitioner’s application without giving any reply. According to him, if
the respondents had informed the petitioner appropriately in 2006
itself, the petitioner would have taken appropriate steps in that regard.
4. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with
the following directions:
If the petitioner submits an appropriate application for power
allocation and complies with the legal requirements for the same, the
concerned Assistant Executive Engineer shall consider the same and
take appropriate steps thereon. The petitioner shall be given
connection as soon as a transformer from which the petitioner can be
given electricity connection is commissioned.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge
w.p.c.34765/09 3