Dismissed

Nilesh Michael v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jan 2016WP(C)/2539/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a Public Interest Litigation filed by Nilesh Michael against the State of Kerala and the KSEB, considered an objection to the drawing of cables of different operators through electric poles. The Court was satisfied that the issue did not require PIL intervention.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as it did not require court intervention as a Public Interest Litigation given the Board's approval.

Nilesh Michael Vs State of Kerala — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶5

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/5TH MAGHA, 1937

¶6

WP(C).No. 2539 of 2016 (S)

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

NILESH MICHAEL, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.MICHAEL, PADATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, OCHANTHURUTHU P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA,

¶12

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POWER, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.

¶13

2. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED,

¶14

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN,

¶15

THIRUVANANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695004.

¶16

3. CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,

¶17

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR,

¶18

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004.

¶19

R1 BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI.C.S.MANILAL R2 & R3 BY SRI.JAICE JACOB, SC

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

mbr/

¶22

WP(C).No. 2539 of 2016 (S)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶25

P1: A TRUE COPY OF THIS DECISION REPORTED IN SURESH KUMAR V KSEB, 1998(1) KLT 395.

¶26

P2: THE GUIDELINESS ISSUED BY THE 2ND REPSONDENT BOARD ON 22.10.1998.

¶27

P3: TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE BOARD BASED ON THE REPORT OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE DATED 18.10.2002.

¶28

P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THIS COURT DATED 06.03.2003 IN OP.NO.4194/2003.

¶29

P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BOARD.

¶30

P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 31.12.2014 OF THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD.

¶31

P7: A NEWS ITEM THAT APPEARED IN THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS, DATED 13.2.2015.

¶32

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J. &

¶38

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶39

================

¶40

W.P. (C) No. 2539 of 2016

¶41

==================

¶42

Dated this, the 25^th day of January, 2016

¶43

J U D G M E N T

¶44

Ashok Bhushan, C.J.

¶45

Heard. This writ petition has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation objecting to the drawing of cables of different operators through the electric poles. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, at best, the electricity pole can be utilized by only one cable operator. It is stated that such a stand was taken by the Kerala State Electricity Board (for short 'Board') after 2012.

¶46

Learned counsel appearing for the Board submits that Board has permitted use of the poles subject to payment of rental by the users.

¶47

We are of the view that the issue which is sought to be raised in the writ petition need not be entertained in a Public Interest Litigation. When the Board has already granted permission, this Court need not entertain this writ petition as a

¶48

W.P(C) No.2539/16

¶49

-:2:-

¶50

Public Interest Litigation. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed.

¶51

Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶54

Rp25/1/2016

¶55

//True Copy//

¶56

PS to Judge

Nilesh Michael v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nilesh Michael v. State of Kerala

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.K. Nazer Vs Shri. T. Mohammed Haneesh

Krishnaprasad Vs Shalini K.V.

Nasar.a Vs Abdul Jabbar U.C.

Sidheequel Akbar Vs the District Collector

A.Shanmughan Vs Vandazhy Grama Panchayat

C.v.Anilkumar Vs the Principal Secretary, Sc-St Development Department