Vilasini v. Kerala State Electricity Board
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/15TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 27254 of 2014 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:
------------------ VILASINI, W/O. LATE RAGHAVAN, GURUVILASM, MUTHUVILA.P.O., KALLARA, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS `RESPONDENTS:
-----------------------
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, VENJARAMOODU.P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695607.
3. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
4. SMT. LALITHA, ALANKOD KARIKKAKATHIL HOUSE, PARAPPIL, MUTHUVILA.P.O., PIN-695610, KALLARA, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
5. BABY, ALANKOD KARIKKAKATHIL HOUSE, PARAPPIL, MUTHUVILA.P.O. PIN-695610, KALLARA, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
6. SAMBAN, SAMBA VILASOM, PARAPPIL, MUTHUVILA.P.O. PIN-695610, KALLARA, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
R6 BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL,SC,KSEB R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 27254 of 2014 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEPT DATED 16-6-14 OF KALLARA VILLAGE.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-8-2014 ISSUED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-8-2014 ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE.
V. CHITAMBARESH, J -------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 27254 OF 2014 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of June, 2015
JUDGMENT
A total non application of mind is well evident from Exts.P5 and P6 orders impugned. All the parties agreed that the matter shall be reconsidered by the third respondent in a proper perspective. A fresh site inspection shall be conducted with notice to all the parties and orders passed anew within three months. The petitioner as well as respondents 4 to 6 are free to make available sketches suggesting the route along which the electricity supply line has to be drawn. Resultantly Exts.P5 and P6 orders are quashed for this limited purpose. The Writ Petition is disposed of.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd