Disposed

Pappan v. Kerala State Electricity Board

Kerala HC20 Aug 2007WP(C)/7312/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the proposal to draw a 110 KV electric line over the petitioner's property. The court directed the concerned authority to fix compensation after hearing the petitioner and release it within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to fix compensation within time granted by ADM after hearing the petitioner and release it within one month.

Pappan Vs Kerala State Electricity Board — Kerala HC (2007) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2007 / 29TH SRAVANA 1929

¶5

WP(C).No. 7312 of 2007(U)

PETITIONER:

PAPPAN, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O. THIRIYAN, VELUPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHANDANIKKADU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.GIRIJA.L. SMT.P.S.PREETHA

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION DIVISION, KSEB, POOVANTHURUTH, KOTTAYAM.

¶15

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KSEB., POOVAANTHURUTH, KOTTAYAM.

¶16

DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.

¶17

R1 TO 3 BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC

¶18

R4 BY G.P. SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶22

P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DT.31.1.2007.

¶23

P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.14.6.2007 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL) AND ADDL. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM.

¶24

TRUE COPY

¶25

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶26

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶27

.................................................................... W.P.(C) No.7312 of 2007

¶28

.................................................................... Dated this the 20th day of August, 2007.

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The W.P. is filed raising objection against drawal of 110 KV electric

¶31

line over petitioner's property. This court directed the matter to be considered by ADM under Section 16(1) of the Telegraph Act. Standing Counsel submitted that ADM has approved the line. Since petitioner is not challenging ADM's order, line can be drawn in terms of ADM's order. However, second respondent or the concerned authority is directed to fix compensation within the time granted by ADM after following the procedure and after hearing the petitioner. Compensation awarded should be released to the petitioner within one month from date of passing the award.

¶32

W.P. is disposed of as above.

¶33

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge

¶34

pms

Pappan v. Kerala State Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappan v. Kerala State Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.J.Antony Vs Raju Jose

Muhammed Basheer Haji Vs Secretary to Got., Revenue Dept.& Others

V.Kesavan Vs State of Kerala and Others

Travancore Khadi and Village Industries Vs Khadi and Village Industries Commission

M/S.Kerala Roadways Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

P.B.Rajamma and Others Vs the Kerala State Financial Enterprises