SINDHU.S Vs. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is against Ext.P3 order issued by the 3rd respondent in exercise of power under Section 16 (1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, read with Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Objections raised against drawing of electric line to the residential building of the 4th respondent was considered by the 3rd respondent. Petitioner as well as respondents 5 to 7 were parties in the proceedings. Two routes for drawing of the line was suggested by the

(2.) ND respondent. One is through property of the petitioner and property of respondents 5 and 6. It requires drawing of 45 meters overhead line and 15 meters weather proof wire. Other one is partly through an existing pathway. The

(3.) CONSIDERING the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the 3rd respondent has not considered the matter in its real perspective. If line can be drawn through an existing pathway without crossing property of any other private persons, it is obligatory on the part of the 2nd respondent to draw the line through such route. The fact that the route is slightly longer is not a reason to permit drawal of line through other private properties. I do not find any justification in declining the route partly passing through a pathway, merely on the ground that it has to be drawn over a waiting shed. Going by contentions now raised, finding to the effect that the 7th respondent will be affected also seems to be not correct. But at the same time whether Sri. Aliyarkunju or the Management of the school has got any objection, is a matter which need to be looked into. Therefore I am of the view a re-consideration of the matter by the 3rd respondent, after issuing notice to all relevant parties is necessary.