M/S Shiva Irrigation Systems Vs the Managing Director

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 31127 OF 2025 (GM-KEB)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S. SHIVA IRRIGATION SYSTEMS SY.NO.121/7, MUDIGERE, KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 576 216 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI. K.P. RAVISH S/O. K.S.PUTTANNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. A COMPANY REGISTERED INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT 1932.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. H.N. SHASHIDHARA, SR. COUNSEL, FOR SRI. H.S. SUHAS, ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD., K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ELEC.), KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, TRANSMISSION (OPERATIONS) ZONE, PRASARANA BHAVANA, 1ST FLOOR, 66/11 KV S/S PREMISES,

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

TUMAKURU - 572 103.

¶18

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (ELEC.), TRANSMISSION, O AND M CIRCLE, KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, PRASARANA BHAVANA, GROUND FLOOR, KOTI, THOPU ROAD, TUMAKURU - 572 103.

¶19

THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ELEC.), O AND M ZONE, BESCOM CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

¶20

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD., O AND M DIVISION, TUMAKURU DIVISION, TUMAKURU - 572 102.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. H.V. DEVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

¶23

SRI. LIKITH R.P, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R4, R3 AND R5)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTIUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.CEE/CZ/SEE(O)/AEE(O)/AE-2/2025.26/5062-65 DATED 26.09.25 ISSUED BY THE R5 VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The petitioner - M/s Shiva Irrigation Systems has

¶32

approached this Court seeking for the following prayers:

¶33

"A. Issue a writ of Certiorari by quashing the communication bearing no. CEE/CZ/SEE(O)/ΑΕΕ(Ο)/ΑΕ-2/2025-26/5062-65 dated 26.09.2025 issued by the 5^th Respondent vide ANNEXURE-A,

¶34

B. Assistant Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to issue the intimation as per the estimate made by the BESCOM officials on 09.01.2024 bearing No.SA.KA.NI.E(V)Gubbi.S.E (T)23-24/3164 and endorsed by Executive Engineer, BESCOM, Gubbi Dated: 08.01.2024 Estimate No.KR258 along with the abstract of the estimate and the Load Biforcation Sketch signed by the Said Engineers vide ANNEXURES- T, T1, T2, & T3 and U and

¶35

C. Issue such other order or direction as deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including the costs, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Heard Sri. H.N.Shashidhara, learned Senior

¶39

Counsel appearing for Sri. H.S.Suhas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Likith R.P., learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 5.

¶40

The petitioner claims to be a small scale industry engaged in manufacture of PVC pipes and other irrigation related products and undertakes execution of works for the Government in providing irrigation facilities to the marginal farmers. It is stated that the petitioner has established its unit with a sanctioned load of 1298 KVA capacity under R.R. Nos.GHT-20 and GHT-27 at Mudigere Village, Gubbi Taluk. Owing to inadequate and fluctuating power supply, resulting in disruption of industrial operations, the petitioner sought separate direct power line through an underground cable (for short 'UG cable') from 110/11 KV sub station in place of existing feeder connection. In this regard, the petitioner has remitted requisite charges and opted to execute the work under the self-execution scheme of the respondent-Authorities.

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

It is the case of the petitioner that both the execution work was completed, the respondent-authorities failed to provide direct power connection, even after a lapse of nearly six months and continued to delay the matter, thereby causing hardship to the petitioner. Aggrieved by such inaction, the petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.Nos.24573/2025 and W.P.No.24551/2025, which came to be disposed of, permitting the petitioner to avail power for F-25 feeder by drawing an independent line, while clarifying that the approval granted would not entitle the petitioner to draw power from F-16 feeder line connected to KMS.

¶44

The grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to the earlier proceedings, the respondents have issued the impugned communication dated 26.09.2025 (Annexure-A), wherein the estimated cost has been revised to Rs.2,44,98,684/-. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the said demand is wholly arbitrary, and exorbitant, inasmuch as the estimate earlier

¶45

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

prepared and recommended by the Engineers was only Rs.18,89,806/-. Being aggrieved by such drastic escalation in the estimate without justification, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶48

This Court on 28.01.2026 has passed the

¶49

following order:

¶50

" Sri.H.N.Shashidhara, Senior counsel for the petitioner, Sri.H.V.Devaraj for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri.Likith R.P., counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5 appeared in person.

¶51

Sri.Prakash M.V., Executive Engineer, BESCOM, Gubbi is physically present before the Court and has been duly identified by his counsel Sri. Likith R.P.

¶52

Office is directed to delete the name of S.H.Prashanth from the cause list.

¶53

Senior counsel on instruction submits that BESCOM had prepared a sketch at Annexure-T3 and it is the shortest route and the cost is estimated at Rs.18,89,806/-. However, as of today, BESCOM has overlooked the sketch and has given a fresh amounting estimation to Rs.2,44,98,685/- and it is a long route. Accordingly, he submits that the sketch and the estimate prepared by the BESCOM

¶54

7 -

¶55

NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

vide Annexure-T2 to T3 may be accepted and appropriate order may be passed.

¶58

Sri. Likith R.P., counsel for respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5 submits that a memo has been filed annexing certain sketches and the sketch prepared by BESCOM authorities is the actual sketch and as per this, the cost is estimated at Rs.2,44,98,685/-. Counsel further submits that the petitioner had drawn the line under self execution scheme under the supervision of the officials of the BESCOM and the same is not in consonance with BESCOM Rules. Hence, an appropriate order may be passed.

¶59

The submission made by respective parties is placed on record.

¶60

As there is dispute with regard to the route, according to the petitioner, the sketch and the estimation at Annexures T2 to T3 is feasible and shortest route. However, as per the BESCOM authorities, the sketch prepared at page 5 of the memo, is appropriate sketch and accordingly, the cost is estimated. As there is dispute about the feasibility and the sketch regarding the drawing of the power lines to the petitioner's small scale industries, it is advisable for the petitioner and the BESCOM authorities to inspect the spot and file the report accordingly.

¶61

In this background, this Court deems it proper to direct the petitioner and Sri.Prakash M.V., the

¶62

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

Executive Engineer of the BESCOM to visit the spot on 04.02.2026 at 11.00 a.m. The petitioner and the respondents are directed to co-operate and submit the report as to the feasibility of the shortest route to enable the petitioner to have the power supply. List this matter on 11.02.2026. "

¶65

Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court,

¶66

the respondent conducted a joint inspection on 04.02.2026 and thereafter filed a report along with the memo enclosing the joint inspection report and the survey sketch, indicating the feasibility of the proposed routes for laying the UG cable. The said survey sketch, prepared in terms of the joint inspection, has been placed on record for consideration of this Court.

¶67

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent do not dispute the location reflected in survey sketch pursuant to the joint inspection.

¶68

9 -

¶69

NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶70

HC-KAR

¶71

The survey sketch is culled out as under:

¶72

BESCOM proposed UG cable
F-25, G
110kV
Cu
Gubbi Currently feeding UG cable
Sub- Private
F
Agriculture
station, land
KPTCL
F-16, C E H I
KMF
M/s Shiva
D Irrigation
F-6, A NJY feeder GHT-20 & GHT-
27

¶73

The sketch indicates the existing line marked at C-E-F-J and H, and the proposed UG cable by the BESCOM

¶74

shown along the line G to I, forming the basis for impugned estimate. It is further indicated that alternative connectivity from G-F or G-J would be made available to the petitioner.

¶75

It is further contended on behalf of the respondents that the cable laid between F-J-H by the

¶76

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶77

HC-KAR

¶78

petitioner has been executed without obtaining requisite quality approvals from the BESCOM, and in this regard, notice has already been issued to the petitioner and proceedings are pending.

¶79

In this context, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the said line between F-J-H has been in operation since the year 2020 and was laid pursuant to the estimate approved by the BESCOM and under the supervision of its officials. It is contended that, at this stage, the respondents cannot contend that the petitioner has not obtained necessary approvals or complied with the requisite formalities.

¶80

Be that as it may, the dispute at present pertains to the UG cable by the BESCOM and the petitioner having an existing UG cable connection between F-E, the petitioner has expressed its willingness to accept the proposed route from G-F, which is agreeable to the

¶81

11 - NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶82

HC-KAR

¶83

respondents, subject to issuance of a fresh estimate to be recommended by the respondent-Authorities.

¶84

Having regard to the submissions made and in

¶85

view of the fact that both the petitioner and the respondents are agreeable to the survey sketch prepared pursuant to the joint inspection, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the impugned communication at Annexure-A and direct the respondents to reconsider the matter in accordance with law. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:

¶86

ORDER

¶87

i) The Writ Petition is allowed .

¶88

ii) The impugned communication dated 26.09.2025 (Annexure-A) issued by respondent No.5 is hereby quashed .

¶89

iii) Respondent No.4 is directed to issue a fresh intimation/estimate in respect of the UG cable along the route G–F, as indicated in the survey sketch within a period of

¶90

12 -

¶91

NC: 2026:KHC:20061 WP No. 31127 of 2025

¶92

HC-KAR

¶93

two(2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶94

iv) Upon receipt of such intimation, the petitioner shall undertake execution of the work under the self execution scheme in respect of the UG cable.

¶95

v) Insofar as existing UG cable at F-J-H is concerned, the petitioner shall obtain necessary quality approvals/NOCs from BESCOM within a period of six(6) months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶96

vi) On such compliance, the respondentBESCOM shall regularize the existing cable F-J-H in accordance with law.

¶97

vii) Till such compliance, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in respect of the existing F-J-H and the notice dated 20.12.2025 (Annexure-X) issued by the Assistant Executive Engineer, shall be kept in abeyance for a period of six(6) months.

¶98