L.GEETHA Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner impugns Ext.P7 proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent - Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kilimanoor, as per which, her objections to the shifting of an electric post into a pathway, which she claims to be her own, has been rejected stating that this Court has fixed specific time lines in Ext.P8 judgment.

(2.) The petitioner says that objections have been raised also by the 4th respondent- Grama Panchayat, but that instead of considering any of the same, the 3rd respondent has issued Ext.P7 proceedings merely for the reason above. She thus prays that Ext.P7 be set aside and the 3rd respondent be directed to consider her objections afresh, thus leading to a statutory reference to the competent Additional District Magistrate under Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act.

(3.) Shri.N.Satheesan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB for short), submits that Ext.P7 proceedings had been issued by the 3rd respondent solely taking note of the time frames fixed by this Court in Ext.P8 judgment. He says that, otherwise, the 3rd respondent can only refer the matter to the competent Additional District Magistrate under Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, which he says the said Officer is ready if this Court so orders.