Kerala High Court
Mr. Babukuttan..S vs Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd on 23 October, 2025
WP(C) NO. 43796 OF 2024 1
2025:KER:78992
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 1ST KARTHIKA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 43796 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
MR. BABUKUTTAN..S,
AGED 63 YEARS
SON OF CHEERALAN,THENGUM TUNDIL HOUSE, PANTHAPLAVU PO,
PATTAZHY,KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691522
BY ADVS.
SMT.J.SURYA
SMT.A.B.BEENU
RESPONDENTS:
1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD,
VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP .BY. ITS
SECRETARY, PIN - 695004
2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
ELECTRICAL DIVISION OFFICE,VYDYUTHI
BHAVANAM,KOTTARAKKARA,KOLLAM, PIN - 691506
3 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION OFFICE VYDYUTHI
BHAVANAM,KOTTARAKARA,KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691506
4 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
COLLECTORATE , CIVIL STATION,VIDYA NAGAR, KOLLAM, KERALA,
PIN - 691013
5 KANNAN PADMAKUMAR,
PADMA VILASAM ,PANTHALAM PO,PATTAZHY DISTRICT,KOLLAM, PIN
- 691522
6 SHRI HARSHAN,
WP(C) NO. 43796 OF 2024 2
2025:KER:78992
HARSHA VILASAM,PANTHAPLAVU PO, PATTAZHY DISTRICT,KOLLAM,
PIN - 691522
BY ADV SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 43796 OF 2024 3
2025:KER:78992
JUDGMENT
The petitioner challenges Ext.P11 order, which rejected his request to shift an electric post erected on his property, to give electric connection to respondents 5 and 6. The petitioner's specific case is that the erection of the post was without his consent and that it is causing obstruction to the construction of the boundary wall in the petitioner's property. Since the request of the petitioner to shift the post was opposed by respondents 5 and 6, the Additional District Magistrate considered the dispute and passed Ext.P11 order rejecting the request of the petitioner primarily on the ground that the post was erected eight years back and the position of the post is such that the construction of the wall is not affected in any manner.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Board, which also states that the post was erected around nine years back, and it is also contended that the alternate proposal suggested by the petitioner was from an electric post, which is situated around 39 metres from the 6th respondent's property, which was found to be impractical and technically not feasible.
WP(C) NO. 43796 OF 2024 4
2025:KER:78992
3. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that Ext.P11 order passed by the ADM in exercise of the powers under the Telegraph Act is illegal. However, the petitioner contends that the placing of the post without his consent has vitally affected his property rights. This judgment will not bar the petitioner from instituting appropriate proceedings in a Civil Court challenging actions that affect his proprietary rights.
Reserving such liberty, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE lsn WP(C) NO. 43796 OF 2024 5 2025:KER:78992 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 43796/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BOARDER SECRETARY FORCE (BSF) PENSIONER'S IDENTITY CARD OF PETITIONER Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 9.1.2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 5.7.2623 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF PETITIONER'S PROPERTY WHERE ELECTRIC POST IS SITUATED Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 7.8.2023 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 28.9.2023 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINANT DATED 7.11.2023 Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.11.2023 FROM THE SECOND RESPONDENT Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 28.11.2023 Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF SHOWING THE VEHICULAR PASSAGE TO THE SIXTH RESPONDENTS Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 30-09-24