IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15299 of 2008(U)
1. K.V.MATHAI @ GEORGE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
3. SRI.THULASI, MANJU BHAVAN, KALLAMUTTOM
4. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
For Petitioner :SRI.ANCHAL C.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. 15299 OF 2008 U
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner received Ext.P1 notice from the 4th
respondent under section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act,
1885. The petitioner is alleged to have filed Ext.P2.
Complaint is that usually the practice followed by the 2nd
respondent is on permission being given by the 4th
respondent, the line will be drawn and charged and the
petitioner will not get breathing time. If the petitioner has filed
Ext.P2 objection before the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent
is bound to consider the same and take a decision thereon in
accordance with law. This direction will be effective only if the
proceedings has not been disposed of as on today.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)
aks
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE