Kerala High Court
C.X Xavier vs Kerala State Electricity Board on 17 July, 2012
Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/16TH BHADRA 1934
WP(C).No. 20824 of 2012 (C)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
C.X XAVIER, AGED 40 YEARS
CHOOLAKKAL HOUSE, MUNDAMVELI P.O.,
NAVY NAGAR, COCHIN 682507
BY ADVS.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH
SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU
SRI.JAGAN ABRAHAM M.GEORGE
SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD
SRI.P.G.PRAMOD
SRI.RAHUL KADAMPULLY
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2. THE AAISTANT ENGINEER
ELECTRICAL SECTION, FORT KOCHI - 682 001.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KSEB, MATTANCHERY - 682 002.
BY SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL,SC,KSEB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 20824 of 2012 )
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17/07/2012 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND REPONDENT.
EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24/07/2012 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPIES OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE EVIDENCING THAT
THE ERCETION OF ELECTRIC POLES AND TRANSFORMER HINDERS THE
ACCESS OF VEHICLES TO THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONERE.
EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04/09/2012 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
ds
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P(C) No. 20824 OF 2012
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 07th day of September, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the installation of the transformer on the eastern side of Parodath Road, opposite to the front gate of the residential property of the petitioner, which allegedly cause hindrance to the vehicular access to the property of the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that the grievance of the petitioner has been projected in Exts. P1, P2 and P4 representations, which are pending consideration before the 2nd and 3rd respondents. The prayer is to intercept the installation of the transformer as above or to direct the respondents to consider the representations and to pass appropriate orders thereon.
2. Heard the learned standing counsel for the Board as well, who submits on instructions, that the averments W.P(C)No. 20824/2012 -2- raised by the petitioner are devoid of any element of truth or bonafides. It is stated that there were several complaints with regard to the low voltage in the area and to remedy the situation. Somebody in the neighbourhood had come forward, stating that he was ready to make free space to install the transformer by the Board and to solve the situation. Considering the actual facts and also the proposal mooted by the concerned person, earnest efforts were taken by the Board to solve the problem and it was accordingly, that the transformer was sought to be installed in the property surrendered by the person as aforesaid. The learned standing counsel further submits that the installation of the transformer does in no way affect the vehicular traffic on the road and it does not and cannot cause any hindrance to the access to the property of the petitioner.
W.P(C)No. 20824/2012 -3-
After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that the pleadings and prayers raised by the petitioner with regard to the alleged cause of action is devoid of any merit. Interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
ds //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE