Disposed

Smt.G. Veena v. the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd.

Karnataka HC1 Apr 2024WP/5760/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging unilateral installation of a transformer by BESCOM officials on petitioners land without notice, the High Court stayed the action pending Land Tribunal proceedings and directed the authorities to issue notices to all stakeholders before proceeding with the construction.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; respondents directed to issue notice to petitioner and stakeholders before installing transformer; petitioner permitted to file objections including availability of vacant land for

Smt.G. Veena Vs the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:13103 WP No. 5760 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 5760 OF 2024 (GM-KEB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. G. VEENA, W/O SRI. S. RAJESH AND D/O LATE M.B. GOVINDARAJ, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.27, MUNIMARAPPA GARDEN, M.M. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 046.

¶8

PRESENTLY R/AT NO.13, 11TH 'A' CROSS, SWIMMING POOL EXTENSION, PARCY LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 003.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. L.S. CHIKKANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., (BESCOM) REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, (PRESENTLY SRI. MAHANTESH BILAGI) BESCOM CORPORATE OFFICE, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (ELEC.) BESCOM, (PRESENTLY SRI. BASAVARAJ B. PATIL) NORTH ZONE, BENSON TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 046.

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:13103 WP No. 5760 of 2024

¶16

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (ELEC.) BESCOM, (PRESENTLY SRI. ASHOK), EAST DIVISION, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENSON TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 046.

¶17

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (ELEC.) BESCOM, (PRESENTLY SRI. PARSHA NAIK) E-1, SUB DIVISION, TANNERY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 005.

¶18

SRI. SYED AFZAL, S/O SRI. ALI HAZI AHMED, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC: ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR AND BUILDER, R/AT NO. 34/1, BENSON CROSS, BENSON TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 046.

¶19

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POWER AND ENERGY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. R. SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. S.R. KHAMROZ KHAN, AGA FOR R6; VIDE ORDER DATED 01.04.2024, NOTICE TO R5 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS FORTHWTIH DEMOLISH THE ILLEGAL STRUCTURES PUT UP BY R4 AND 5 AND FURTHER RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENTS FROM INSTALLING THE BESCOM

¶23

¶24

NC: 2024:KHC:13103 WP No. 5760 of 2024

¶25

TRANSFORMER AND OTHER POWER UNITS IN THE PETITION SCHEDULE LAND, AND MAY BE PLEASED TO ISSUE SUCH OTHER WRITS, DIRECTIONS AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS INCLUDING THE ORDER HAS TO COSTS AND ETC.,

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The petitioner asserts that he acquired right, title over the land bearing Sy.No.101/1 measuring East to West:106 feet and North to South:120 feet under the Will dated 28.01.2006 alleged to have been bequeathed by her maternal grandmother. Petitioner further asserts that the entire extent of land in Sy.No.101/1 is an Inam land and an application under Section 9 of Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inam Abolition Act, 1954 (for short "the Act, 1954") was filed by the father and uncle of the petitioner for grant of occupancy right and the same is pending consideration before the Land Tribunal concerned as of today.

¶29

Given the circumstances, the respondent Nos.1 to 4 have constructed a shed illegally for the purpose of installation of transformer without following due process of law.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pending consideration of the application for grant of occupancy right, respondent Nos.4 and 5 have no authority to install the transformer without following due process of law and therefore, the respondents be restrained from putting up any illegal construction on the subject land.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:13103 WP No. 5760 of 2024

¶33

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 submits that the entire extent of land in Sy.No.101/1 is vested with the Government free from all encumbrances as stated under the provisions of the Act, 1954 and therefore, in the absence of any source of title, the petitioner cannot claim right over the said land. Therefore, pending consideration of the application, respondent Nos.1 to 4 have authority to install the transformer. He further submits that in the event the petitioner succeeds before the Land Tribunal, he is entitled for compensation in accordance with law.

¶34

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties.

¶35

Admittedly, the entire extent of land in Sy.No.101/1 is vested from the Government, free from all encumbrances under the provisions of the Act, 1954 and claim for grant of occupancy right in respect of subject land is pending before the Land Tribunal. Therefore, pending consideration of the right of the petitioner to be registered as an occupant, respondent Nos.1 to 4 without issuing notice to the petitioner has put up construction for the purpose of installation of transformer and the same is in violation of Principles of natural justice.

¶36

The petitioner has taken up a specific contention that adjoining to the existing transformer , there is a vacant land to an extent of one acre in the said survey number and without shifting the said transformer to the available vacant land, the respondents are trying to install the transformer in the subject land, at the

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:13103 WP No. 5760 of 2024

¶39

instance of rival claimants who are claiming right over the subject land. Therefore, I proceed to pass the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i) The petitioner stands disposed off, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to issue notice to the petitioner and other stakeholders before taking any action for installation of the transformer.

¶42

ii) Petitioner is permitted to file objections with the respondent Nos.1 to 4 including the availability of vacant land available for shifting the existing transformer.

¶43

iii) The construction put up by respondent Nos.1 to 4 is subject to the final out come of the proceedings before the Land Tribunal.

¶44

All contentions are kept open.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

PNV

¶47

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10 CT: BHK

Smt.G. Veena v. the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.G. Veena v. the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. C. Anjali Vs the Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company Ltd.

Coromandel Sugars Limited Vs Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission

Doddathippeswamy Vs Asst Executiven Engineer

Mahammad Rashid Vs the State of Karnataka

H Raviprakash Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Muninanjappa Vs State of Karnataka