This Writ Petition is filed challenging Ext.P1 order passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Kollam, the 3rd respondent allowing the Kerala State Electricity Board to draw electric line to the house of the 4th respondent through the property owned by the petitioner. By order dated 06/03/2009, taking note of the submission made by the Standing Counsel for the KSEB that line has already been drawn, this Court ordered that, if the line is not energized, it will not be charged for a period of two weeks. The said interim order was not extended thereafter. 2. The contention raised in this Writ Petition is that the route proposed in Ext.P1 to cause serious prejudice to the petitioner and it was without considering the objections raised by the petitioner the District Magistrate passed Ext.P1 order.
3. I have considered the contentions raised in the Writ Petition and also heard the arguments of the learned Standing W.P.(C).No.7240 of 2009 2 Counsel for the Board and the learned Government Pleader.
4. A perusal of Ext.P1 order passed by the 3rd respondent would show that, on the basis of the materials on record the District Magistrate came to the conclusion that the route proposed by the Board is most feasible one and that it will not cause any imminent danger to human life and property and will cause only least inconvenience to the petitioner. There is absolutely no material on record to conclude that the reasoning of the 3rd respondent in Ext.P1 order is either perverse or arbitrary, warranting interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 petition before the 3rd respondent seeking review of Ext.P1 order, which request was turned down by Ext.P3 order. Going by Ext.P1 order, there is no alternate route to draw electric line to the house of the 4th respondent. Though the petitioner in Ext.P2 would contend that there is an alternate route to draw electric line, the petitioner has not chosen to produce any materials to substantiate the same.
W.P.(C).No.7240 of 2009 3 I find absolutely no grounds to interfere with Ext.P1 order passed by the 3rd respondent. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
skj ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE