Disposed

Jacob Mathew v. Kerala State Electricity Board

Kerala HC1 Feb 2012WP(C)/1769/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged KSEB's proposal for a 110 KV line. Court directed petitioner to approach Additional District Magistrate under Section 16 of Indian Telegraph Act to raise objections via regular forum rather than interfering directly.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to approach Additional District Magistrate, Kannur within three weeks with objections; matter to be disposed by Magistrate within three months.

Jacob Mathew Vs Kerala State Electricity Board — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.P.RAY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/12TH MAGHA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 1769 of 2012 (U)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

PUTHENPURAKKAL JACOB MATHEW, S/O.GEORGE,AGED 51 YEARS,NIDIYENGA AMSOM KAYIMBAYI DESOM,NIDIYENGA.P.O,SREEKANDAPURAM(VIA) TALIPARAMBA TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶8

KACHAYIMAKKOOL MUHAMMED AJMAL,

¶9

S/O.MUSTHAFA,AGED 45 YEARS,VALAPATTANAM.P.O VALAPATTANAM AMSOM,KANNUR TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI

¶11

SRI.V.A.SATHEESH

¶12

SRI.J.ABHILASH

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VYDYUTHI BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶15

ASSISTANT ENGINEER,

¶16

TRANSMISSION CONSTRUCTION SECTION KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,CHEMPERI.P.O KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 643.

¶17

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TRANSMISSION DIVISION KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN P.O. KANNUR-670 002.

¶18

R1-R3 BY SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON,SC,KSEB BY SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON,SC,KSEB

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

W.P.(C) NO. 1769/2012

¶21

: 2 :

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶24

EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE JENM DEED NO.1674/1992 OF S.R.O SREEKANDAPURAM DATED 11.05.1992 EXECUTED BY NHALLIMAKKAL MARIYAMMA AND ANOTHER IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶25

EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.1510/2009 OF S.R.O. SREEKANDAPURAM DATED 22.05.2009 EXECUTED BY CHERIYANDEELAKATH MUSTHAFA IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.

¶26

EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2229/2009 OF S.R.O. SREEKANDAPURAM DATED 01.08.2009 EXECUTED BY KACHAYIMAKKOOL NOORJAHAN IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.

¶27

EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PLAN OF PROPOSED 110 K.V LINE AND THE REPORT OF RESPONDENTS DATED 23.09.2010.

¶28

EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE 2ND PLAN OF PROPOSED 110 KV LINE AND THE REPORT OF RESPONDENTS DATED 12.01.2011.

¶29

EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE 3RD PLAN OF PROPOSED 110 KV LINE AND THE REPORT OF RESPONDENTS DATED NIL.

¶30

EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN W.P.(C) NO.26221/2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 03.10.2011.

¶31

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

B.P. RAY, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 1769 of 2012

¶37

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶38

Dated this the 1^st day of February, 2012.

¶39

JUDGMENT

¶40

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶41

The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the

¶42

following prayers:

¶43

To issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or such other writ or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to call for entire records leading to Ext.P5 and P6, examine and quash the same.

¶44

To issue a writ of Mandamus or writ in the nature of Mandamus or such other writ or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the respondents to accept Ext.P4 plan and to draw line as per the scheme.

¶45

To issue a writ of Mandamus or writ in the nature of Mandamus or such other writ or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the respondents to seek the permission of the Additional District Magistrate under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act.

¶46

The proposal mooted by the KSEB to draw a 110 K.V line from Sreekandapuram to Chemperi is under challenge in this writ petition. By order dated 03.10.2011 in W.P.(C) No. 26221 of 2011, KSEB was directed to approach the learned Additional District Magistrate under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, if it proposes to draw the line through any portion of the land belonging to the Puthukkad Estate owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Kannur. The learned

¶47

W.P.(C) No. 1769/2012

¶48

: 2:

¶49

Standing Counsel for KSEB submits that similar matters are pending before the Additional District Magistrate, Kannur and this matter may also be referred to the Additional District Magistrate for adjudication in accordance with law. Therefore, I direct the petitioner to approach the Additional District Magistrate, Kannur within three weeks from today and raise all his objections regarding the drawing of the line through the property of the petitioner. If an objection is filed, the learned Additional District Magistrate shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other affected persons. The entire exercise shall be concluded within three months from today.

¶50

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶51

sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE.

¶52

¶53

W.P.(C) No. 1769/2012

¶54

: 3:

¶55

B.P. RAY, J.

¶56

O.P.No. 13887 of 2002

¶57

W.P.(C) No. 1769/2012

¶58

: 4:

¶59

Dated this the 12^th day of January, 2012.

¶60

JUDGMENT

Jacob Mathew v. Kerala State Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jacob Mathew 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Management of Itdc, Kovalam Vs the Labour Court, Kollam

M.Nafeesa Beevi Vs State of Kerala

K.v.Annamma Vs the State of Kerala

K.Krishnan Asari Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

T.Stephen Das Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Tom Sunil Xavier Vs Kerala State Electricity Board