High Court of KeralaWP(C)/22873/2013dismissed

Ratnamani v. Additional District Magistrate

2015-04-01Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2015/11TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 22873 of 2013 (H) PETITIONER:

--------------------- RATNAMANI D/O.MAVILA KRISHNAN NAMBIAR, P O KAVUMBAI SREEKANDAPURAM, PRESENTLY R/A.SAUPARNIKA, MLA ROAD UDAYAMPEROOR P O, ERNAKULAM -682307 BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM JOHN RESPONDENTS:

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

1. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KANNUR, KERALA STATE -670003

2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VAIDYUTHIBHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP BY ITS SECRETARY-695001

3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SUB STATION, SUB DIVISION, P O KANKOL PAYYANNUR-670307 R2 & R3 BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON, SC, KSEB SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 22873 of 2013 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO 2627/2000 P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 17/8/2013 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE

V. CHITAMBARESH, J W.P.(C). NO. 22873 OF 2013 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 01st day of April, 2015

JUDGMENT

As many as 10 persons were arrayed as respondents in the proceedings before the Additional District Magistrate of Kannur. The proceedings were in terms of Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 preparatory to the drawing of the electricity line. Eight persons participated in the enquiry except the petitioner and another.

The Government Pleader on instructions submits that notice was served on the petitioner through the Village Officer. The notice dated 11.07.2013 was served through the Village Officer on 20.07.2013 intimating the date of hearing as 03.08.2013. The Electricity Board also points out that the petitioner was very much at site when the Additional District Magistrate himself conducted a local inspection.

W.P.(C). NO. 22873 OF 2013 2 3.

The electricity line does not cross any building of the petitioner. The petitioner did not appear before the Additional District Magistrate and participate in the enquiry. It is difficult to digest that no notice was served on the petitioner when eight others could individually participate in the enquiry. Added to this is the fact that the Additional District Magistrate later conducted a site inspection.

I am not inclined to interfere with Ext. P2 order in the circumstances. The writ petition is dismissed. V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE