SHEELA ANTONY v. STATE OF KERALA

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM – 682 030. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, THEVAKKAL ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, THRIKKAKARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 021. THE SECRETARY, KALAMASSERY MUNICIPALITY,KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM – 683 104. **ADDL.R4 MR.THAMPY R.S, AGED 50 YEARS, PADUTHOLIL HOUSE, ENTE MOTNE ROAD, K.P NAGAR, EDAPPALLY NORTH, KOCHI-682024. (ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 05/09/2018 IN I.A.NO.1/2018)** **ADDRESS OF R4 IS CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 11.09.2020 IN I.A.1/2020 IN WP(C) 11858/2018 AS: THAMPY T.S, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 'ASWATHY' PADUTHOLIL HOUSE, KPNRA 95, ENTE MONTE ROAD, K.P.NAGAR, EDAPALLY NORTH, KOCHI – 682 024. ADDL.R5 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE (ADM), COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, ERNAKULAM – THEKKADY ROAD, KAKKANAD, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 030. IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.01.2024 IN W.P.(C)NO.11858/2018 WP(C) NO. 11858 OF 2018 2 BY ADVS. SRI.ARUNKUMAR A., SC, KSEB SRI.M.K.ABOOBACKER,SC KALAMASSERY MUNCIPALITY SRI. JUSTINE JACOB (SR GP) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 11858 OF 2018 3 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of certain extent of property situated abutting the Peechinga Parambu Road, Kalamassery, which is an area falling under the jurisdiction of the Kalamassery Municipality. The petitioner is a consumer of electricity under the Electrical Section, Thevakkal, Thrikkakara. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that without the consent and permission of the petitioner and without determining and paying any compensation to the petitioner, the Electricity Board has drawn certain electric supply lines across the property of the petitioner, affecting the value of the property and also affecting the right of the petitioner to enjoy the property to its fullest extent. The petitioner has therefore approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:- i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction directing the 2nd respondent to remove the 3 phase electric line and electric posts drawn and erected in the property of the petitioner. ii)Issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to pay the compensation to the petitioner. WP(C) NO. 11858 OF 2018 4

2. The learned counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board would refer to the counter affidavit filed in this case to contend that the electricity lines in question have been established over the property of the petitioner even prior to the date on which the petitioner purchased the said property. However, it is conceded that the electric lines in question pass over the property of the petitioner and no procedure contemplated by the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with the provisions of the the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 have been followed in order to determine whether any alternate method of drawing lines without affecting the property of the petitioner is possible and if not, whether the petitioner is entitled to any compensation for drawal of electric lines over the property of the petitioner. In paragraph 5 of the statement filed by the 2nd respondent, it is stated as follows:- “It is submitted that the line can be shifted to maximum extent possible from the petitioners property by providing 4 line cross arms to ensure safety for which direction has been given. The work can be done by KSEBL on safety aspects provided that the petitioner’s cooperation is necessary to carry out the work. It is also submitted that since more than 9 consumers are WP(C) NO. 11858 OF 2018 5 connected from this line, dismantling of the line will make more hardships and affect the life of these consumers and their consent is also required for the same. But, in order to ensure further safety, the lines can be replaced by Covered conductor / Areal Bunched Cables after collecting work deposit amount from the petitioner. The above petition is devoid of merits and the petitioner has not a primafacie case warranting the interference of this Hon’ble Court and hence this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the same with costs.”

3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board, I am of the view that the claim of the petitioner must be considered by the competent authority in terms of the provisions contained in the Electricity Act, 2003 read with the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The said authority must also determine as to whether any alternate method of drawing lines is possible without affecting the property of the petitioner in any manner, especially considering the contents of paragraph 5 of the statement filed by the 2nd respondent, which is extracted herein above. Since it is submitted that the Additional District Magistrate (ADM), Ernakulam, will be the competent authority to determine the WP(C) NO. 11858 OF 2018 6 matter as directed above, the Additional District Magistrate (ADM), Collectorate, Civil Station, Ernakulam – Thekkady Road, Kakkanad, Kochi, Ernakulam, PIN – 682 030 is suo motu impleaded as additional 5th respondent to the writ petition. On the petitioner producing a copy of this judgment together with a copy of this writ petition before the additional 5th respondent, he shall initiate proceedings for determination of the issues referred to above with notice to the petitioner and to the 2nd respondent. A decision shall be taken by the additional 5th respondent, as directed above, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The writ petition will stand disposed of as above. DK Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE WP(C) NO. 11858 OF 2018 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11858/2018 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P3 EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT P5 EXHIBIT P6 EXHIBIT P7 EXHIBIT P8 THE PHOTOS SHOWING THE ELECTIC POSTS AND WIRES THROUGH THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DATED 10.07.2013 THE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 05.02.2016. THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 10.07.2016. THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 30.01.2017 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORT. THE TRUE COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORT. THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FIELD BEFORE THE MINISTER FOR ELECTRICITY DATED 27.02.2017. RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R2(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12- 01-2021