Dismissed

Saraswathi B. v. the Kerala State Electricity Board

Kerala HC1 Jun 2022WP(C)/7971/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ petition challenging an ADM's order rejecting objections to shifting an electric line. The court found the line was installed on the road side without affecting the petitioners' property or causing hindrance, and no interference was warranted.

What did the court decide?

None. The writ petition was dismissed as it was found to be sans merit.

Saraswathi B. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 7971 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1SARASWATHI B.
AGED 79 YEARS
D/O. BHANU, KAVITHA, MELVETTOOR P. O.,
VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695312.

¶8

2DEVARAJAN V.
AGED 67 YEARS
S/O. VASUDEVAN, ODITTAKADA,
GOKULAM, CON. NO.10138, MELVETTOOR,
VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695312.

¶9

3 N. BALAKRISHNAN AGED 76 YEARS S/O. NANU, GEETHAM, CON. NO.10383, MELVETTOOR, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695312.

¶10

4SUNDARESAN G.
AGED 85 YEARS
S/O. SU BHAVANAN, VILABHAGOM, MELVETTOOR,
VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695312.

¶11

BY ADVS.
M.BALAGOVINDAN
A.ANOOP

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, 2ND FLOOR, CIVIL STATION BUILDING, VIDHYUDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.

¶14

2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 141.

¶15

WP(C) NO. 7971 OF 2022

¶16

2

¶17

3 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL)COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 043.

¶18

4 ANASARI KAPIL, JESNALAYA, MELVETTOOR P. O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695312.

¶19

5 THE VETTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE VETTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, VETTOOR P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 564.

¶20

6 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 141.

¶21

BY ADVS.
K.V.ANIL KUMAR
JOSWIN THAMPI
SIJU KAMLASANAN

¶22

SR.G.P. JUSTIN JACOB

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶24

WP(C) NO. 7971 OF 2022

¶25

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The order of the ADM dated 08.01.2022 rejecting the objection of the petitioners for laying the line on the property of the 4^th respondent has been assailed in the present writ petition.

¶28

The facts in brief are that petitioners are the residents of Vettoor Grama Panchayath having a small bit of land on which a building has been constructed. 4^th respondent purchased land adjacent to the petitioners’ property having more than one hector of land ie., 2.5 acres and submitted an application before the Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer, Varkala, Thiruvnanathapuram for shifting the electric line passing through his property purported to be decade back to the public road outside his property. 2^nd respondent had already prepared a plan to draw 11KV line through underground. For the reason best known the said scheme was abandoned. When such application was submitted the petitioners raised an objection. It is contended that the inspection conducted by the ADM was just an eyewash as shifting of the electricity line to the house of the 4^th respondent has

¶29

WP(C) NO. 7971 OF 2022

¶30

¶31

actually affected the property of the petitioners. The said 11KV line emits electromagnetic radiation which can be dangerous to the biological system. The road is having a width of hardly 3 meters and petitioners being the commuters of the public road are very much aggrieved by the shifting of the electric line and therefore the order is liable to be set aside. The 6^th respondent has though already installed the electric post but the line has not been energised.

¶32

On the other hand, learned counsel for the electricity board and the 4^th respondent submit that the electric line had already been energized on 07.02.2022. However, this Court on when 10.03.2022 passed an order of stay, applicable only if it was not already energized and actually it is not affecting the property of the petitioners as all electric posts are always installed on the side of the road for providing an electric line to the houses in land.

¶33

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.

¶34

This Court during the course of the hearing, was shown the photographs demonstrating the position of the electric post. It

¶35

¶36

WP(C) NO. 7971 OF 2022

¶37

shows that the post is on the extreme left side of the road and there is no impediment or hindrance or width of the road has been truncated, nor the post is in the property of the petitioners affecting their land. In Ernakulam, if we walk on a pathway the electricity lines/wires are routed with permissible limit/height and not a single case of emission of electromagnetic rays has been reported. It appears that the route already taken has caused least inconvenience to all including the petitioners. I do not find any justification warranting interference in the order of the ADM to form a different opinion.

¶38

The writ petition sans merit, accordingly dismissed.

Sd/-

AMIT RAWAL

JUDGE

nak

WP(C) NO. 7971 OF 2022

¶45

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7971/2022

¶46

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶47

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
16.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS 2
AND 3 ALONG WITH 2 OTHERS BEFORE THE SUB
DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE ALONG WITH ITS
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P1(a)TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED NIL
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS AND OTHERS
BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.02.2021
ISSUED BY THE JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT ON
BEHALF OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH
TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08.01.2022
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH
ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

Saraswathi B. v. the Kerala State Electricity Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saraswathi B. v. the 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raji K., Vs State of Kerala

Atc Telecom Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Vs Assistant Engineer

Rajappan Nair K.S Vs Smt. Dr. P.K. Jayasree

Ramadas P D Vs Biju Prabhakar

K.T.Manoj Kumar Vs the Excise Commissioner

Karthiyani Vs State of Kerala