Disposed

S & R Cable Vision v. K.S.E.B. Others

Kerala HC5 Aug 2009WA/1713/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ appeal by directing the appellant to remit regularisation charges of Rs.16,000/- and directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation with notice to other parties within three months.

What did the court decide?

Appellant directed to remit Rs.16,000/- within a week; respondents directed to consider Ext.P1 representation with notice to petitioner and fourth respondent within three months.

S & R Cable Vision Vs K.S.E.B. Others — Kerala HC (2009) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931

¶5

WA.No. 1713 of 2009()

¶6

--------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.35204/2008 Dated 07/07/2009

¶7

APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER

¶8

¶9

S & R CABLE VISION, MALSYAPURI P.O., KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY SANU T.R., MANAGING PARTNER, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. RAVINDRAN.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS

¶12

¶13

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION OFFICE, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

ASSISTANT ENGINEER,

¶16

ELECTRICAL SECTION OFFICE, THEVARA.

¶17

THADEVOOS, S/O. JOSEPH, VATHURUTHY CABLE VISION, MALSYAPURI P.O., VATHURUTHY.

¶18

ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R1 TO 3

¶19

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

S.R.BANNURMATH, C.J. &

¶21

KURIAN JOSEPH,J.

¶22

W.A.No.1713 of 2009

¶23

Dated this the 5^th day of August, 2009

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Kurian Joseph,J.

¶26

Appellant is the petitioner. The writ petition was filed praying for a direction to consider Ext.P2 representation by the first respondent. The issue pertains to the regularisation of the drawing of cables by the petitioner through the electric poles maintained by the Electricity Board. Learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the application itself was defective. The main defect is that the petitioner had not remitted the regularisation charges. On instruction, now the learned Standing Counsel submits that the amount would come to around Rs.16,000/-. It is also submitted that there is a dispute, in any case, regarding six

¶27

W.A.No.1713 of 2009

¶28

poles out of the 31 poles. It is further submitted that permission has already been granted to another person for drawing the cables through electric poles. That person is the fourth respondent herein. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that it is only appropriate that the first/second respondent is directed to consider the issue with notice to the appellant and the fourth respondent on condition that the appellant remits the amount of Rs.16,000/- immediately.

¶29

Therefore, this writ appeal is disposed of directing the appellant/petitioner to remit an amount of Rs.16,000/- within a week from today subject to the final decision taken by the second respondent. There will be a direction to the first/second respondent to consider Ext.P1 representation with notice to the petitioner and the fourth respondent and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of three months from the date of

¶30

W.A.No.1713 of 2009

¶31

-:3:-

¶32

production of a copy of this judgment. We make it clear that we have not pronounced finally upon the liability of the appellant and those are matters for the first/second respondent to decide. Till a decision is taken as above, proceedings for dismantling of the cables already drawn by the appellant/petitioner will be deferred.

¶33

S.R.BANNURMATH, Chief Justice

¶34

KURIAN JOSEPH, Judge

¶35

ahg.

¶36

BANNURMATH, C.J. & KURIAN JOSEPH,J.

¶37

W.A.No.1713 of 2009

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

5^th August, 2009

S & R Cable Vision v. K.S.E.B. Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S & R Cable Vision v. K.S.E.B. Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bijimol Devassia Vs Gnaneswary

Kerala Bus Transport Association, Vs State of Kerala

A.M.Hameedkutty Vs R.K.Jayaraj and Others

Devaki Vs Manager,State Bank of India,Ongallur

Union of India Vs K.P.Rathna Latha

V.Mohammed Hassan Vs Ramanattukara Grama Panchayath