Council Of Residents In Vrindavan ... vs The Chairman/Managing Director
2021 Latest Caselaw 23832 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  SATURDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 26351 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          COUNCIL OF RESIDENTS IN VRINDAVAN GARDENS
          MF4-III, VRINDAVAN HOUSING COLONY, NEAR VYDHUTHI
          BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004, REPRESENTED
          BY ITS SECRETARY.
          BY ADV M.HEMALATHA


RESPONDENT:

    1     THE CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR,
          KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN,
          PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
    2     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL), KERALA STATE
          ELECTRICITY BOARD ,
          VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
    3     ADDL.R3 THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD,
          HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED
          BY ITS SECRETARY - 695 001.
          [ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 29/11/2021]
          BY ADVS.
          ARUNKUMAR A., SC, KSEB
          MANOJ RAMASWAMY-ADDL.R3



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.26351/2021

                                   2




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 4th day of December, 2021

The petitioner, who is the Secretary of the Council

of Residents in Vrindavan Gardens situated at Pattom Village

in Thiruvananthapuram, has filed this writ petition seeking to

direct the 1st respondent to consider and dispose Ext.P4

representation within a time limit fixed by this Court and also

sought to forestall all the attempts of the 2nd respondent to

demolish the western compound wall of the 2 nd respondent

and take the vehicles through the property of the petitioner.

2. In brief, the case of the petitioner is that there is a

road leading to their residential colony. There is a public road

from Pattom to Medical College. On the eastern side of the

boundary wall of the 2nd respondent, Vydhuthy Bhavan, a WP(C).No.26351/2021

byelane road is leading towards east, ending in the colony.

According to the petitioner, the said road is a private road and

the Kerala State Electricity Board has no right over the road.

Now the Kerala State Electricity Board is trying to demolish a

compound wall in order to take their vehicles through private

road.

3. The passage of vehicle belonging to the Kerala

State Electricity Board will make traffic blocks in the areas and

will affect the peaceful life of the residents in the colony. The

petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P4 representation to the 1 st

respondent requiring the 1st respondent to look into the matter

and do the needful by directing the Kerala State Electricity

Board to desist from their present attempt to start electric

charge station any where near the housing colony.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents

1 and 2 submits that the said road is vested with the

Trivandrum Corporation and is maintained by the Trivandrum

Coporation. It is a public road. The Corporation authorities WP(C).No.26351/2021

have invited tender for surfacing the road. Further mores,

from Annexures A-1 and A-II, it is evident that the road in

question is a public road maintained by utilizing public friends.

Therefore the petitioner cannot contend that others including

the Kerala State Electricity Board has no right to access the

road.

5. The learned Standing Counsel representing the

additional 3rd respondent submits that they have received an

application for issuance of NOC to the Kerala State Electricity

Board for accessing the proposed charging station of the

Kerala State Electricity Board and the application of NOC has

been rejected on 30.11.2021.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Standing Counsel representing the

respondents, this Court is of the considered view that the

petitioner has approached the 1st respondent raising the

grievance. Ext.P4 is the representation submitted by the

petitioner. In view of the allegations made by the petitioner WP(C).No.26351/2021

and the confident stand taken by the additional 3 rd respondent,

this Court is of the view that the 1 st respondent shall pay

attention to the issue and take a considered and appropriate

decision in the matter in accordance with law after hearing the

affected parties.

In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation

submitted by the petitioner after granting an opportunity of

hearing to the representative of petitioner's association and

representative of the 3rd respondent as well as the

representative of the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram, if

warranted and take a decision in accordance with law within a

period of one month. Till such time the parties will maintain

status quo as regards the usage of the road in question.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE rps/ WP(C).No.26351/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26351/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 16.7.2008 BEARING NO.3035/08 IN FAVOUR OF SRI. T.S.RAJAN AND MEERA PRABHA.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOS OF THE ROAD. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE MAIN GATE AND THE WICKET GATES.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION WITH POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 18.11.2021.

REPONDENT'S EXHIBITS

ANNEXURE A-I TRUE COPY OF THE E-TENDER NOTICE DATED 28.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION.

ANNEXURE A-II A COLOUR PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE GRANTIE PLAQUE LAID AT THE SUBJECT ROAD AND ENGRAVED WITH THE DETAILS OF MAINTENANCE CARRIED OUT BY THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION.

ANNEXURE A-III A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.

GO (RT) NO. 473/2019/TRANS DATED 15.10.2019