The High Court disposed of the appeal, clarifying that the appellant must bear the shifting cost unless evidence of hazard to safety is produced before the electricity company, which would then examine such material.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 467/2021
Yogesh Kumar Tailor (Advocate) S/o late Shri Kamal Kumar Tailor, aged about 29 years, R/o Plot No.48, Ganpati Nagar, Nangal Jesa Bohara, Jhotwara, Jaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Tailor, the appellant in person Mr. Vimal Chand Choudhary For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
16/11/2021
This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 01/04/2021 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14639/2020.
The petitioner is occupying a residential unit near to which there is a Transformer installed by the Jaipur Vidhut Vitran Nigam Limited (JVVNL). The petitioner desires that such Transformer be shifted for safety reasons. The learned Single Judge disposed of
(2 of 2)
[SAW-467/2021]
the writ petition allowing the petitioner to move an application for shifting Transformer elsewhere, which would be considered by the JVVNL at the cost of shifting to be borne by the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Transformer is installed very close to the residential unit occupied by the petitioner with his family members. The electricity company has demanded a sum of Rs.2,26,347/- from the petitioner for shifting Transformer, which the petitioner is unable to afford.
There is nothing on record to suggest that the Transformer is installed at a location which would be hazardous for the safety of the petitioner and his family members. In that view of the petitioner, if the petitioner still requires shifting of the Transformer, obviously he has to bear the cost for the same.
While therefore not interfering with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, it is clarified that if the petitioner is able to produce any evidence before the electricity company of the location of the Transformer being hazardous to the safety and security of the residents nearby, the electricity company shall examine such material that the petitioner may place on record.
With this observation, the appeal is disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
(AKIL KURESHI),CJ
Anil Goyal/BM Gandhi-PS/9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Single Judge's order allowing the petitioner to apply for shifting the transformer subject to cost.
Whether the appellant needs to produce evidence of hazard before the electricity company for the transformer to be shifted at the company's cost.
Yogesh Kumar Tailor
Managing Director, Jaipur Vidhut Vitran Nigam Limited
Assistant Engineer, G-4, Power House, Kardhani
Junior Engineer, Power House, Niwaru Road
Junior Engineer, G-4, Power House, Kardhani
Akil Kureshi
Rekha Borana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
