Disposed

A.Ramakrishnan v. Thajuddin & Others

Kerala HC1 Jan 2009WP(C)/21/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the installation of an electric line across the petitioner's property. It directed that the line not be drawn unless the petitioner raises contentions before the concerned ADM. The petition was disposed without adjudicating the merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed directing that line shall not be drawn unless permission granted by ADM for raising contentions.

A.Ramakrishnan Vs Thajuddin & Others — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2009 / 11TH POUSHA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 21 of 2009(C)

PETITIONER(S):

A.RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O.AYYAPPANKUTTY, MELVEEDU, CHENGANIYUR KAVU, P.O.MATHUR AGRAHARAM,

¶10

ALATHUR TALUK.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.C.RAGHAVAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

¶14

THAJUDDIN, S/O.SULAIMAN, KULATHINGAL HOUSE, CHENGANIYUR KAVU, P.O.MATHUR AGRAHARAM, ALATHUR TALUK.

¶15

THE ASST.ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, KOTTAYI.

¶16

THE ADDL.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PALAKKAD.

¶17

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

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN FOR R3 ADV.SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN, SC, KSEB FOR R1, 2

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 1.1.2009 , THE COURT ON 01/01/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

K.M. JOSEPH, J.

¶21

¶22

W.P.(C) No. 21 OF 2009 C

¶23

¶24

Dated this the 1^st day of January, 2009

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

Petitioner has approached this court feeling aggrieved by the move to give electric connection to the house of the 1^st respondent i.e., line ABC in Ext.P1. According to the petitioner, there are alternate routes. The prayer is to prohibit the respondents from drawing electric line through ABC in Ext.P1 in order to give power connection to the house of the 1^st respondent. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to give electric connection to the house of the 1^st respondent after complying with the legal formalities and if they decide to give connection, to do the same drawing line through the alternate routes suggested by the petitioner.

¶27

I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. C.Ragavan, learned Government Pleader and learned standing counsel for the Board. Learned standing counsel and learned Government Pleader would submit that the matter has been referred to the concerned Magistrate and the matter is being

¶28

WPC.21/09

¶29

: 2 :

¶30

considered by him. This is a dispute which is to be resolved by the ADM.

¶31

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of directing that unless permission is granted by the ADM for drawing line to give connection to the 1^st respondent, the line shall not be drawn over the property of the petitioner. It is for the petitioner to raise all his contentions before the ADM.

¶32

Sd/- (K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶33

aks

¶34

// TRUE COPY //

¶35

P.A. TO JUDGE

A.Ramakrishnan v. Thajuddin & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Ramakrishnan v. Thajuddin & 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

A.Ismail Beevi Vs Shajahan

P.P.Sebastian Vs Village Officer

Arun Vs the Circle Inspector of Police,Nedumkand

M/S.Malabar Collections (P) Ltd. Vs the Asst. Commissioner

K.T.Anil,Mg.Partner of M/S.a One Food Pr Vs Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) & Others

Vivish Thomas Vs Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)