Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Ushashree Lakshminarayana vs The Deputy Commissioner on 14 December, 2022

                                                -1-
                                                           WP No. 16912 of 2022




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

                                              BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 16912 OF 2022 (GM-KEB)
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   SMT. USHASHREE LAKSHMINARAYANA
                        W/O SRI SRINVIAS KALYAN ALLADA
                        AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
                        R/AT NO H906, GOPALAN GRANDEUR APARTMENTS
                        HOODI, BENGALURU 560048
                                                                ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. RAJESWARA P N.,ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
                         MYSURU DISTRICT
                         KRISHNARAJA BELAVADI ROAD
                         K G KOPPAL, KAJJIHUNDI
                         MYSURU 570001

                   2.    CHIEF ENGINEER
                         MAJOR WORKS DIVISION
                         KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED
Digitally signed         MANDYA DIVISON
by                       FTS COMPOUND, N R MOHALLA
NIRMALADEVI
Location: HIGH           MYSURU 570007
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   3.    CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED
                         HAVING ITS OFFICE AT E R
                         KRSM DIVISION,
                         MALAVALLI 571430
                         REP BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL)

                   4.    M/S JAIN IRRIGATION SYSTEMS LTD
                         A PUBLIC COMPANY REGISTERED
                         UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956
                         HEAD OFFICE AT NO 51/1
                                -2-
                                          WP No. 16912 of 2022




    KOTTANDARAM LAYOUT
    HERMIT COLONY
    SHIVAN SHETTY GARDEN
    HALASURU
    BENGALURU 560042
    REP BY ITS PROJECT MANAGER
                                                  ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G M CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR R1
     SRI H V DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2
     SRI K S BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R3
     R4 SERVED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING
IN KPTCL 66/2021 DTD.16.3.2022 PASSED BY THE R-1 DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER UNDER SECTION 16 OF THE INDIAN TELEGRAPH
ACT 1885 READ WITH SECTION 164 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 2003
AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, learned AGA for Respondent No.1, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 and learned counsel for Respondent No.3.

2. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

"i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the Order bearing No.KPTCL 66/2021 dated 16.03.2022 passed by the 1st Respondent Deputy Commissioner under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 read with Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 at Annexure-A;

ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents No.2 to 4 to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 16.04.2022 at Annesxure-B read with the Revised Check Survey Report at Annexure-J and

iii) Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble deems fit to pass under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

3. It is the case of the Petitioner that an electricity transmission line is being drawn by Respondent No.3 and the same passes through the land of the Petitioner. However, the said transmission line can be drawn by an alternative route by avoiding the land of the Petitioner and the said alternative route has been proposed and a sketch of the same has been annexed at Annexure-J to the Writ Petition. However, Respondent No.1 has conducted proceedings under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Telegraph Act') and the Petitioner has not participated in the same.

4. The Respondent No.3 has filed an affidavit on 8.11.2022 placing on record the fact that alteration as suggested by the Petitioner is not possible. However, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner disputes the same and -4- WP No. 16912 of 2022 submits that alteration is permissible and suitable steps have also been furnished by the Petitioner and the Petitioner is also willing to bear the costs of the said alteration.

5. On 2.12.2022, the submission of the learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 was that an opportunity to the Petitioner is available under Section 17 of the Telegraph Act to seek for alteration/modification of the transmission line. In response, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that liberty may be reserved to the Petitioner to approach Respondent No.1 with a suitable application under Section 17 of the Telegraph Act. However, the apprehension of the Petitioner is that the order dated 16.3.2022 passed under Section 16 of the Act by Respondent No.1 would be held against the Petitioner in the proceedings to be conducted under Section 17 of the Act. The learned Counsel further apprehends that drawing up of transmission line project by Respondent No.3 is nearing completion and the completion of work would be to the prejudice of the Petitioner.

6. The learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that despite completion of the work, Section 17 of the -5- WP No. 16912 of 2022 Telegraph Act contemplates a situation for alteration of the transmission line.

7. In view of the aforementioned, it is just and proper that the above Writ Petition be disposed off with liberty to the Petitioner to approach Respondent No.1 under Section 17 of the Act and a direction be issued to Respondent No.1 that the order dated 16.3.2022 passed under Section 16 of the Telegraph Act not be held to the prejudice of the Petitioner in the proceedings that may be conducted under Section 17 of the Telegraph Act and the said proceedings be concluded within a stipulated time frame.

8. In view of the aforementioned, I pass the following:

ORDER i. The Writ Petition is disposed off;

ii. The Petitioner is at liberty to approach Respondent No.1 with a suitable application under Section 17 of the Telegraph Act within a week from today after serving an advance copy of the same to the learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3;

iii. If such an application is made within the time stipulated herein, Respondent No.1 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to the Petitioner as well as Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to putforth their contentions, within a further period of 30 days;

iv. It is made clear that the order dated 16.3.2022 passed by Respondent No.1 under Section 16 of the Telegraph Act will not operate to the prejudice of the Petitioner in the proceedings to be initiated under Section 17 of the Telegraph Act.

v. All contentions of the parties are kept open.

SD/-

JUDGE ND List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65