High Court Kerala High Court

Simon vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 17 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
Simon vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 17 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7810 of 2009(U)


1. SIMON, S/O.SIMON,AGED 68 YRS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. DAISY VARKEY, W/O.VARKEY,AGED 42 YEARS,
3. LAISAMMA, AGED 38 YEARS,W/O.BENNY,
4. SEBASTIAN, AGED 38 YEARS,S/O.JOSEPH,
5. SHEEJA SEBASTIAN,W/O.SEBASTIAN,AGED 32
6. CHANDI,S/O.JOSEPH,AGED 46 YEARS,
7. ALEXANDER, S/O.VARKEY, AGED 42 YEARS,
8. JOHNSON, S/O.MATHEW,AGED 45 YEARS,
9. JOHN,S/O.JOSEPH,AGED 50 YEARS,
10. SEBASTIAN, S/O.DEASSIA, AGED 58 YEARS,
11. JACOB, S/O.ULAHANNAN, AGED 39 YEARS,
12. ANNAMMA, W/O.DESSIA, AGED 90 YEARS,
13. GEORGE, M.A, S/O.ABRAHAM, AGED 52 YRS,
14. SEBASTIAN, S/O.JOSEPH,AGED 35 YEARS,
15. PHILOMINA, W/O.JOY, AGED 45 YEARS,
16. JOHNY,S/O.JOSEPH,AGED 38 YEARS,
17. JOSEPH, S.O.JOSEPH,AGED 50 YEARS,
18. JOSEPH, S/O.ULAHANNAN,AGED 42 YEARS,
19. DOMINIC,S/O.THOMAS,AGED 40 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

 Dated :17/03/2009

 O R D E R
                          K.M.JOSEPH, J.
         ------------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) No. 7810 of 2009-U
            ----------------------------------------------
            Dated, this the 17th day of March, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

The issue relates to the drawing of 110 K.V. line

to which the petitioners have objection. According to the

petitioners they have consented only to drawing of 66 K.V.

line. Now, what is sought to be drawn is 110 K.V. line. They

have resistance to the drawing of line.

2. Learned standing counsel for the Kerala State

Electricity Board, on instruction, would submit that, in view of

the resistance of the petitioners as expressed in the writ

petition the matter can be referred to the Additional District

Magistrate. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. There will

be a direction to the 2nd respondent to refer the matter

regarding permission to the concerned Additional District

Magistrate who will take a decision in accordance with law,

with opportunity to the parties. In view of the urgency

pressed by the learned standing counsel, there will be a

further direction to the Additional District Magistrate to dispose

of the matter within six weeks from the date of receipt of the

WPC No. 7810/2009 -2-

petition from the 2nd respondent. Needless to say, unless

permission is granted under Section 16, the 2nd respondent

cannot do any of the acts which are prohibited under law.

(K.M.JOSEPH)
JUDGE.

MS