High Court of KeralaWP(C)/14030/2015disposed of

Prasad v. The Additional District Magistrate

2015-07-28Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2015/6TH SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 14030 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------- PRASAD, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.N P UNNI, NJARAPADATH HOUSE, 'NEERANJANAM', OLARIKKARA P. O., PULLAZHI, THRISSUR - 680 012.

BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY RESPONDENTS:

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

1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR 680003

2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

3. SMT. LILLY AUGUSTINE, AGE AND HUSBAND'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MUNDOKARAN HOUSE , OLARIKKARA, THRISSUR 680 012

4. SMT.BABY , W/O.SURENDRAN, CHEMBALA VEEDU, OLARIKKARA, THRISSUR - 680 012.

R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL,SC,KSEB BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 14030 of 2015 (C) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 :- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO C4-SR/ET/57/2014 DTD 19/2/2015 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P2 :- TRUE COPY OF THENOTICE NO C4-S.R/ET/57/2014 DTD 2/3/2015 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 :- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO C4-S.R/E.T/57/2014 K DIS DTD 27/5/2015 EXHIBIT P4 :

TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING ALTERNATE PROPOSAL FOR DISMANTLING LINE.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE.

V. CHITAMBARESH, J -------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 14030 OF 2015 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of July, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner contends that a stay wire through his property should be avoided if possible. The electricity line (along the proposed route) does not cross his property. 2.

The petitioner has suggested an alternate route. Ext.P4 sketch produced along with the reply affidavit indicates this route.

I direct the second respondent to consider the alternate proposal suggested by the petitioner. The same shall be done within a period of one month from today. 4.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition and the connected pleadings before the second respondent for compliance.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd