Kerala High Court
Jalaludheen vs Deputy Collector (General) And ... on 29 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 7371 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
JALALUDHEEN, S/O.MUHAMMED HANEEFA,
AGED 54 YEARS, MUSHTAQUE MANZIL, VAZHICHAL,
KUTTAMALA. P.O,VAZHICHAL VILLAGE,KATTAKKADA TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 685505
BY ADV T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI
RESPONDENTS:
1 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL) AND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
MAGISTRATE, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695043
2 ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, KSEB, KATTAKKADA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695572
3 ADDL. R3 OTTASEKSHARAMANGALAM PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM, P.O.,
OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, 695125.
[ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 14/03/2022
IN I.A. 1/2022 IN WP(C) 7371/2022.]
BY ADVS.
SRI.JUSTIN JACOB, GP FOR R1
SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR, FOR R2
GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW, FOR R3
K.PUSHPARAJAN ACHARY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No. 7371 OF 2022
2
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J.
===========================
WP(C) No. 7371 OF 2022
============================
Dated this the 29th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the
Additional District Magistrate in an application submitted by
the Assistant Executive Engineer, the 2 nd respondent to shift
DP structure in front of the shop of the petitioner. The
Additional District Magistrate, by Ext.P5 order, directed to put
DP structure with four legs post instead of two legs at the site.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd
respondent and paragraph 4 therein reads as follows:
The KSEBL has submitted three proposals before the
ADM. One is to shift the existing DP structure towards
back. If the same is done for bearing the line load the
stays also to be shifted towards back near the building
which will be more inconvenient to the petitioner so the
1st proposal is not feasible. The second proposal is to
WP(C) No. 7371 OF 2022
shift the DP using four leg pole, without changing the
existing stays shifted earlier. The said proposal was
approved by ADM. Third one is proposed by the
petitioner. That is to shift the poles towards the
boundary of the petitioner. If the DP structure is shifted
towards the boundary, there is a safety issue. No
statutory clearance will be there from the existing High
mast light installed by the local authority. KSEBL is not
the owner of the High mast light. There is no right for
KSEB to collect the work deposit amount to shift the
High mast light. So this proposal is also not feasible. If
the DP structure is shifted towards boundary, as
proposed by the petitioner consent need to be obtained
from the nearest property owners to erect new stays.
3. It is stated that the 3rd proposal submitted by the
petitioner is not feasible as it requires the consent of the
owner of the neighbouring property. It is also stated that
there will be no statutory clearance from the High mast light
installed by the Panchayat. After hearing the Counsel on both
sides, I am of the view that the matter requires a re-
WP(C) No. 7371 OF 2022
consideration by the Additional District Magistrate, as regards
the feasibility of the 3rd proposal.
4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1 st
respondent to consider the application of the licencee under
Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act afresh with notice to
the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 and any other affected
parties as pointed out by the licencee in paragraph 4 of the
counter affidavit. This shall be done within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till
orders are passed as above, the interim order granted by this
Court will continue. The address of the property owners
referred to in the Counter Affidavit of the 2 nd respondent shall
be furnished to the 1st respondent by the petitioner while
producing the copy of the judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
JUDGE
nk
WP(C) No. 7371 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7371/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P-1 THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PRESENT POSITION OF
THE ELECTRIC POST
Exhibit-P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C)
1971/2022 DATED 28.01.2022
ExhibitP-3 TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSITION OF THE
HIGH MASK LIGHT AND ELECTRIC POST
Exhibit-P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
3/02/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit-P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2022
ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit-P-6 TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXITS-P-5
