Disposed

Prabhakaran v. the Additional District Magistrate, Civil Station

Kerala HC5 Jul 2018WP(C)/4200/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner alleged illegal erection of a tower on his property by the Electricity Board. The Court held that the designated authority must consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within one month.

What did the court decide?

The 2nd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's Ext.P3 objection and pass appropriate orders expeditiously within one month.

Prabhakaran Vs the Additional District Magistrate… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶3

THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶4

PETITIONER

¶5

PRABHAKARAN, S/O.SANKARAN, VALLIKADU VALAPPIL, EZHAVATHURUTHI AMSOM, ERIKKAMANNA DESOM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶6

BY ADVS.SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR SRI.RANJIT BABU SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 505.

¶9

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679 583.

¶10

KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIR MAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶11

R2,R 3 BY ADV. SRI.ARUNKUMAR A., SC, KSEB

¶12

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI SHAMSUDHEEN V K

¶13

R2, R3 BY SRI.SUDHEER GANESH KUMAR R., SC, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY

¶14

BOARD LIMITED

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 4200 of 2018 (Y)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

EXT P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 08/01/2016. EXT.P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH PLAN SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF TOWER, LIE OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/10/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 08/11/2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶20

JJJ

¶21

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶22

W.P.(C) No. 4200 of 2018 (y)

¶23

Dated: 05^th July, 2018

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

The petitioner complains that the Kerala State Electricity

¶26

Board, the 3rd respondent, erected a tower illegally on his property. Though the petitioner complained to the 1st respondent, so far he has not considered the petitioner's objections. Aggrieved, he has filed this writ petition.

¶27

In response to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the Additional District Magistrate, the 1st respondent, has already forwarded the petitioner's Ext.P3 representation to the 2nd respondent and it is the 2nd respondent, who has to consider the petitioner's representation.

¶28

W.P.(C) No. 4200/2018

¶29

-2-

¶30

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Board has however submitted that the Board erected the tower about 25 years ago, and only now the petitioner has come before this Court. As seen from the record, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 representation on 18.10.2016. If the 2nd respondent concludes it as a stale claim and if such conclusion could be legally sustained, he is free to inform the petitioner accordingly. All that this Court appreciates is that the authorities must act on a citizen's grievance.

¶31

I, therefore, dispose of the writ petition holding that the 2nd respondent will consider petitioner's Ext.P3 objection and pass appropriate orders expeditiously, within one month.

¶32

Sd/DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE

¶33

jjj

¶34

05/07/2018

Prabhakaran v. the Additional District Magistrate, Civil Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakaran v. the Additional District Magistrate, Civil Station

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

V. Bhargavan Pillai Vs G.K. Shylaja Kumari

Subaida Vs the Authorized Officer, Magma Housing Finance Ltd.

Sam.J.Varghese Vs Abdul Ansari

Muhammad Naufal Vs the Recovery Officer

Green Gateway Leisure Ltd. Vs the State Bank of India

Balachandran V.S Vs the Moovattupuzha Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd.