SAJEEV.V Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in W.P(C) No.505/2017 are in appeal challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20.02.2017. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

(2.) The writ petition was filed by the petitioners challenging Ext.P4 order of the 2nd respondent issued under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). As per Ext.P4, the 2nd respondent has directed drawal of an electric line through the property of the appellants over the points that are marked in Ext.R4(e) sketch by the letters AFGD. According to the appellants, an electric line has been there for the past 45 years, which was drawn through the property of the 4th respondent. It was pursuant to a request made by the 4th respondent, the shifting has been ordered. Consequent to the shifting, the line has been directed to be drawn through the property of the appellants. The said order was challenged contending that, shifting of an electric line is permissible under Section 17 of the Act only within the same property. Therefore, the 2nd respondent exceeded his authority in ordering shifting of the line from the property of the 4th respondent and installing the same within the property of the appellants.

(3.) The learned Single Judge found that consequent to the shifting that has been ordered, it would be possible to provide electric connection to four consumers out of whom, two are the appellants themselves. Since it was to provide electric connection to the appellants themselves that the line was being drawn, the learned Single Judge found that there is no harm in utilizing their own property for the purpose. Accordingly, the impugned order Ext.P4 has been sustained. The said judgment is under challenge in this appeal.