Mr.C.C.Sreekumar Vs. the Additional District Magistrate and Deputy Collector (Gen

Mr.C.C.Sreekumar vs The Additional District Magistrate and Deputy Collector (Gen

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 07, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1011198

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1011198
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh
Decided On: Jan 07, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mr.C.C.Sreekumar

Respondent

The Additional District Magistrate and Deputy Collector (Gen

Excerpt

.....exhibits exhibit-p1- true copy of the order dated 02 11/2012 passed by the ist respondent. exhibit-p2- true copy of the complaint dated 12 11/2012 submitted by the petitioner to the respondents 1 & 2 respondents' exhibits : nil /true copy/ p.a. to judge. v. chitambaresh, j -------------------------------- wp(c) no. 26879 of 201.------------------------------------ dated this the 7th day of january, 2013 judgment the first respondent by ext.p1 order granted permission to draw an electricity line under section 16 of the indian telegraph act. the property over which the line was drawn belonged to one arundhathi amma. the petitioner is one of the four legal heirs of arundhathi amma. the petitioner contends that he was not put on notice or heard before the first respondent passed ext.p1 order granting permission.2. ext.p2 is the representation submitted by the petitioner and pending with the first respondent. the first respondent shall verify from the records as to whether the petitioner was served with notice in the proceedings. the first respondent shall dispose of ext.p2 representation in case no notice had been served on him prior to ext.p1 order. the other legal heirs of arundhathi amma shall also be put on notice and heard if ext.p2 representation is to be considered on merits. the entire exercise shall be done within a period of two months from 2 wp(c) no. 26879/2012 the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.3. it is however stated that line has already been drawn pursuant to ext.p1 order of the first respondent. therefore status quo as on today shall continue till orders, if any, are passed on ext.p2 representation. the writ petition is disposed of. v. chitambaresh judge ncd

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 17TH POUSHA 193 WP(C).No. 26879 of 2012 (H) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- MR.C.C.SREEKUMAR, KUMAR BHAVAN KANAKKARY P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.C.PADMAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL), KOTTAYAM KOTTAYAM ”

100.

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, ETTUMANOOR ”

104.

3. MR. BABUKUTTAN VATTAKOTTAYIL HOUSE, KANAKKARY P.O. KOTTAYAM ”

104.

4. ARUNDHATHI AMMA KUMAR BHAVAN, KANAKKARY P.O., ETTUMANOOR KOTTAYAM”

104. ADDL.

5. SRI.SASIKUMAR VIPANCHIKA, KANAKKARY (P.O.), ETTUMANOOR KOTTAYAM DISTRICT- 686104. ADDL.

6. SMT.VALSALA.P.R. MALIAKAL, KANAKKARY (P.O.) KOTTAYAM DISTRICT- 686104. ADDL.

7. SMT.MINI D/O.K.N.GOPALAN NAIR, KALAPPURAKKAL (H) KANAKKARY (P.O.), ETTUMANOOR, KOTTAYAM -686104. ADDL. R5 TO R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01 12/2012 IN IA 15417/2012. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.M. SANEER BY SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR K.GOPAL,SC,KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 26879/2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02 11/2012 PASSED BY THE IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT-P2- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 12 11/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. V. CHITAMBARESH, J -------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 26879 OF 201.------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of January, 2013 JUDGMENT The first respondent by Ext.P1 order granted permission to draw an electricity line under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act. The property over which the line was drawn belonged to one Arundhathi Amma. The petitioner is one of the four legal heirs of Arundhathi Amma. The petitioner contends that he was not put on notice or heard before the first respondent passed Ext.P1 order granting permission.

2. Ext.P2 is the representation submitted by the petitioner and pending with the first respondent. The first respondent shall verify from the records as to whether the petitioner was served with notice in the proceedings. The first respondent shall dispose of Ext.P2 representation in case no notice had been served on him prior to Ext.P1 order. The other legal heirs of Arundhathi Amma shall also be put on notice and heard if Ext.P2 representation is to be considered on merits. The entire exercise shall be done within a period of two months from 2 WP(C) No. 26879/2012 the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

3. It is however stated that line has already been drawn pursuant to Ext.P1 order of the first respondent. Therefore status quo as on today shall continue till orders, if any, are passed on Ext.P2 representation. The Writ Petition is disposed of. V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE ncd

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties Mr.C.C.Sreekumar vs The Additional District Magistrate and De... Same Subject Education Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh