Karnataka High Court
Rathna vs Government Of Karnataka on 15 March, 2023
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
WP No. 17231 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 17231 OF 2022 (GM-KEB)
BETWEEN:
1. RATHNA
D/O. PARAMESHWARA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
4-248/3, BRAHMASHREE NARAYANA GURU NAGARA,
KENJAR VILLAGE, PEJAVARA POST-574 142,
MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA.
2. VIMALA
W/O. SUNDARA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
NO.1-334, ARANTHOTA HOUSE,
MOODUSHEDDE VILLAGE AND POST-575 028,
THIRUVAIL, VAMANJOOR,
MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT.
Digitally signed
by R
HEMALATHA 3. LALITHA
Location: HIGH W/O. CHANDRAHASA,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
2-123, MUKESH NIVAS,
KANTHARABETTU,
ULAIBETTU VILLAGE AND POST-574 145,
MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT.
4. DHARMARAJA
S/O. LATE PARAMESHWARA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
MELINA MANE/ACHU KAIYARA MANE,
PEJAVARA POST-574 142,
KENJAR VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT.
-2-
WP No. 17231 of 2022
5. SHRI. UMESH POOJARY
S/O. LATE PARAMESHWARA POOJARY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
MELINA MANE/ACHU KAIYARA MANE,
PEJAVARA POST-574 142,
KENJAR VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT.
6. MADHAVI
W/O. KRISHNA KARKERA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
NO.1-B-02, THOKURU, RAMPAL,
THOKURU, JOKATTE POST-575 011,
MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. MAITREYI KRISHNAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY.
2. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION
CORPORATION LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR,
CORPORATE OFFICE, KAVERI BHAVAN,
BENGALURU-560 009.
3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
MANGALURU-575 001.
4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
MANGALURU SUB-DIVISION,
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
MANGALURU,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
MANGALURU-575 001.
5. TAHSILDAR
MANGALURU TALUK,
-3-
WP No. 17231 of 2022
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
MANGALURU,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
MANGALURU-575 001.
6. ADDITIONAL CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR
ANUGRIHA APARTMENT,
GANDHI NAGAR, MANNAGUDDA,
MANGALURU-575 003.
7. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
BRUHAT KAMAGARI VIBHAGA,
KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION
CORPORATION LIMITED, KAVOOR,
MANGALURU-575 015.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.M. CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR R1, R3 TO R5;
SRI. H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-7;
R-6 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
COMMUNICATION DATED 31.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE R-7
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICITY) BEARING NO.
KaaNilm/BriKaV/Mum/SaKaNilmNo-2/5436-39 (PLACED AS
ANNEXURE-U) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners are the joint owners of land in survey No.7/3 and 7/6, Kenjar Village, Mangaluru Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District on which, house bearing door No.1-237 is located. The petitioners further claims to be residing in the said house, and the respondent-Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd., (for short KPTCL) has undertaken a project to convert the single 110 KV transmission route between the 220/110/3/11 KV MSEZ substation and the Jokatte Railway Traction Sub-
-4- WP No. 17231 of 2022station into double transmission sector circuit line via double transmission towers.
2. Petitioners' grievance is that due to conversion of the transmission lines into double transmission lines, they will be deprived of their rights of residence in the house constructed on the subject land, since there was a casualty and accident that had taken place on earlier occasions due to strapping of the transmission lines.
3. Petitioners submitted a representation with the respondent-KPTCL to acquire the house property belonging to them, stating that they will be deprived of their right to reside in the house due to conversion of transmission lines into double transmission lines.
4. The respondent-KPTCL, issued the impugned endorsement stating that they don't have authority to acquire the land under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Resettlement and Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
5. The petitioners have produced the copies of the spot inspection conducted by the Revenue Inspector as well as the Deputy Tahasildar concerned indicating that, there are chances of endangering of human life due to the radiation caused by the transmission lines.
-5- WP No. 17231 of 20226. Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, deals with the power of telegraph authority to place and maintain telegraph lines and posts. Section 10(d) of the I T. Act, 1885 specifies that, in exercise of the powers conferred by this Section, the telegraph authority shall do as little damage as possible, and, when it has exercised those powers in respect of any property other than that referred to in clause(c), shall pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers.
7. Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 deals with exercise of powers conferred by Section 10, and disputes as to compensation, in case of property other than that of a local authority. Sub-section (3) of Section 6 of the Act, 1885 specifies that, if any dispute arises concerning the sufficiency of the compensation to be paid under clause (d) of Section 10, it shall, on application for that purpose by either of the disputing parties to the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the property is situated, be determined by him.
8. The petitioners claim that their lives will be put in danger in view of the conversion of the transmission lines, and they are entitled for compensation.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent-KPTCL submits that the compensation amount of Rs.6,26,55,078/- has been deposited by the Railway department with the Assistant Commissioner for distributing it to the respective owners of the -6- WP No. 17231 of 2022 land who have been adversely affected by the conversion of the Transmission lines.
10. Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the writ petition directing the 3rd respondent to consider the representation dated 3.3.2022 at Annexure-P and pass an appropriate order determining the compensation payable to the petitioners in the light of Section 10(d) of the IT. Act, 1885.
11. The 3rd respondent at the time of determination of the compensation is required to consider the report submitted by the Revenue Inspector concerned and also the Deputy Tahasildar concerned dehors the impugned communication issued by respondent No.7 at Annexure-U.
12. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Resettlement and Rehabilitation Act, 2013, is a matter which requires to be considered by the 3rd respondent after notifying the interested parties.
13. The over head transmission lines having been already converted, the relief sought for in prayer column 'c' does not survive for consideration.
14. The said exercise shall be concluded within four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
-7- WP No. 17231 of 202215. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE HR