Water Front Enclave Resident’S vs The Deputy Chief Engineer on 23 May, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 11567 of 2009(M)


1. WATER FRONT ENCLAVE RESIDENT'S
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGIEER,

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

4. CORPORATION OF KOCHI,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, K.S.E.B

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :23/05/2009

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                      ================
             W.P.(C) NOs. 11567 & 12437 OF 2009
             =========================

             Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

In these writ petitions, the grievances raised being common,

the cases are heard and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In so far as WP(C) No.11567/09 is concerned, the

petitioner is Water Front Enclave Residents Association. They

were aggrieved by the electric posts that were installed by the

respondent Board at a busy junction known as the Chilavannoor

Water Front Road Junction. They have been requesting the

authorities to shift the electric posts. According to the petitioners,

not only that their complaints are ignored, but the respondents

were proposing to install a transformer in the objectionable

location. It was at that stage after filing Ext.P2 complaint, the writ

petition was filed.

3. In so far as WP(C) No.12437/09 is concerned, the

petitioners are residents of the aforesaid area. Their grievance is

against Ext.P3, an order passed by the Additional District

Magistrate exercising his powers under the Indian Telegraph Act

and ordering that the transformer be installed at the place

WPC 11567 & 12437 /09
:2 :

objected to by the petitioner in WP(C) NO.11567/09, as the

location is in close proximity to the residential houses of the

petitioners. From Ext.P3 in WP(C) NO.12437/09, it would appear

that when steps were initiated for the installation of the

transformer at a particular location, that was objected to,

necessitating proceedings before the Additional District

Magistrate resulting in Ext.P3. By Ext.P3, it has been ordered that

the transformer be installed at the location objected by the

petitioners herein.

4. The admitted factual position is that while passing such

an order, the petitioners in these writ petitions who are affected

by such order were not put on notice nor were they heard. In my

view, when an order in the nature of Ext.P3 referred to above is

passed, it is only appropriate that the Additional District

Magistrate shall hear all the affected parties.

5. Therefore, I set aside Ext.P3 in WP(C) NO.12437/09

and direct that the Additional District Magistrate shall reconsider

the request made by the Assistant Executive Engineer, KSEB,

Ernakulam and pass orders thereon with notice to the petitioners

in these cases or anybody else, who is likely to be affected by

WPC 11567 & 12437 /09
:3 :

such order.

6. Petitioners may produce a copy of this judgment

before the Additional District Magistrate, who shall reconsider the

matter as directed above, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.

Writ petitions are disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp