IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18558 of 2008(H)
1. ABDUL LATHEEF THONDIKKADAN
... Petitioner
2. AYISHABEEVI NAMBANKUNNATH,
3. KHADEEJA MAMMILIPPATTU,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
... Respondent
2. KSEB, REP. BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
3. MAMMILIPPATU POKKER
For Petitioner :SRI.E.NARAYANAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :20/06/2008
O R D E R
K.M.JOSEPH, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
WP.(C) No. 18558 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioners have approached this court feeling aggrieved by the
attempt of the second respondent to draw electric line across the properties
of the petitioners for giving connection to the third respondent.
2. Heard learned counsel for the second respondent also.
3. Undoubtedly Section 16 of the Telegraph Act provides that
if there is resistance by a person, the matter has to be adjudicated by the
concerned Magistrate, and only if the Magistrate grants permission, the line
can be drawn. The second respondent is bound by law to seek permission
from the Magistrate, if there is any objection. Learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that the line has not been drawn.
In such circumstances the writ petition is disposed of as
follows:
If the electric line has not been drawn across the properties of
the petitioners for giving connection to the third respondent, the second
respondent will seek permission from the concerned Magistrate under
Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act and only upon permission being
granted the line can be drawn across the properties of the petitioners.
(K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE)
sb