HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Murali Purushothaman, J
PRIDA I – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved by action of respondents 3 to 5 in installing a transformer and electric poles near the property of the petitioner obstructing the ingress and egress and thereby diminishing the value of the property. Though the petitioner approached the Additional District Magistrate under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the Additional District Magistrate by Ext.P2 order found that the transformer need not be removed from the said site and permitted the KSEB to install the transformer. It appears that the petitioner also approached the Kerala Lokayukta and the Lokayukta by Ext.P4 order directed the officials of the Board to ensure that there is no hindrance for ingress and egress to her property because of the position of the stay wire and earth pipe. It is submitted by the petitioner that pursuant to the direction of the Lokayukta, the stay wire has since been removed. The petitioner has approached the 1st respondent District Collector for a request for shifting the transformer and the electric poles.
2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Electricity Board submits that the transformer has already been energised on 15.02.2022.
3. According to the petitioner, ev
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.