High Court of KeralaWP(C)/4825/2015disposed of

Mohammed B.A v. The Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.,

2015-03-09Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/18TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 4825 of 2015 (C) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------- MOHAMMED B.A, AGED 51 YEARS S/O.ABDUL KHADER, BLAYIPARAMBIL HOUSE, N.H.

A.K.G.ROAD, TOLL GATE, EDAPPALLY.

BY ADVS.SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ SRI.K.P.MAJEED RESPONDENT(S):

-------------------

1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VYDHYUTHI BHAVANANAM PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION CIRCLE, K.S.E.B, KALAMASSERY - 682 024.

3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DMRC, DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION, EASTERN ENTRY TOWER ERNAKULAM - 682 035.

4. M/S.KMRL LTD., 8TH FLOOR, REVENUE TOWER, PARK AVENUE KOCHI - 682 011.

R1&2 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON,SC,KSEB R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.) R4 BY ADV. SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC, KOCHI METRO RAIL LTD. R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND (SR.) R3 BY ADV. SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN, SC, DELHI METRO RAIL CORPN. R BY SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL,SC,KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 4825 of 2015 (C) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------- P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 8/12/2014 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT P2:TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF EXISTING 110 KV KL-FA FEEDER & PROPOSED 110 KV FEEDER P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.DBE 4/METRO/14-15/996 DATED 12/1/2015 ON THE BASIS OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

------------------------------ //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE.

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

--------------------- W.P (C) No.4825 of 2015 --------------------- Dated this the 9th day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

A 11 KV Feeder-I line is being drawn over the property of the petitioner. The petitioner has moved the second respondent in Ext.P1 representation seeking compensation for the damage sustained. Any assessment made by the first respondent has to be satisfied by the fourth respondent as per the norms.

2. I direct the second respondent to consider Ext.P1 representation with notice to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. The needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The Writ Petition is disposed.

Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

nj.