IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19803 of 2009(U)
1. KENT CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
3. THE ASST. EXE. ENGINEER,
4. THE ASST. ENGINEER,
5. SRI.K.S.SUDHI,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :15/07/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
---------------------
W.P.(C).No.19803 OF 2009
------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of July, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner submits that they are a company engaged in
construction activities. It is stated that in 84.810 cents of
land in survey Nos.116/2,116/5,116/5-13 of Edapally
South Village, they have constructed 13 villas and applied
for power supply to the said premises. According to the
petitioner, the application was sanctioned and they have
made remittance of the required amounts as well.
2. It is stated that when the officers of the Board
commenced work, the 5th respondent raised objection and
as a result of which further work has been discontinued. It
is stated that, since then there has not been any progress in
this matter. Complaining of this situation, petitioner has
filed Ext.P4 representation to respondents 2 to 4 and there
has not been any progress, even thereafter. It is in these
circumstances the writ petition is filed.
WP(c).No.19803/09 2
3. Even on the petitioner’s own showing, the work for
drawing line to the premises in question was discontinued on
account of the objection raised by the 5th respondent. When
objection is raised in the manner as done by the 5th
respondent, respondents 2 to 4 are required to move the
District Magistrate as provided under Section 16(1) of the
Indian Telegraph Act. There is nothing to show that such
proceedings have been initiated.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the
3rd respondent to move the District Magistrate, as required
under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act for removal of
the obstruction offered by the 5th respondent. Such application
shall be made as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within
3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along with
a copy of the writ petition.
(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/
WP(c).No.19803/09 3