Dismissed

Shyam Singh v. Raj Rajya Vidyut Pra Nigam Andors

Rajasthan HC28 Nov 2023CW/15563/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A High Court order dismissing a writ petition seeking directions not to install electric poles in agricultural fields. The court held the petition infructuous as the installation occurred in 2009 and a coordinate bench had already decided a similar case.

What did the court decide?

No directions issued; petition dismissed as infructuous with all pending applications also dismissed.

Shyam Singh Vs Raj Rajya Vidyut Pra Nigam Andors — Environment and Pollution | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15563/2009

¶3

Shyam Singh Son of Shri Late Shri Sawai Singh Ji, aged 59 years, Resident of Dabla Khurd, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Vidyut Bhawan, Jan Path, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur through its Chairman & Managing Director

¶7

The Chief Engineer (T & C), Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Jaipur

¶8

The Assistant Engineer (C&M-TCC-II), Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, Chambal Power House, Hawa Sarak, Jaipur

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dikshant Jain for Mr. Akhil Simlote For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Lodha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jai Lodha

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

28/11/2023

¶14

Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

¶15

following prayer:-

¶16

“(i) Call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner and examine the same.

¶17

(ii) by an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, thereby direct the Respondents not to install the electric poles/towers and not to lay the High Tension Line from the agricultural fields of the petitioner situated in village Dabla Khurd, Tehsil Phagi, District Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶18

(iii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly also be passed in favour of the humble petitioner.

¶19

(iv) Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the humble petitioner.”

¶20

[CW-15563/2009]

¶21

(2 of 2)

¶22

By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the respondents to not to install electric poles/tower and not allow to lay high tension line from his agricultural field.

¶23

At the outset, counsel for the respondents apprised this Court that the electrical pole as well as the high tension line has already led in the year 2009 itself, so, under the changed circumstances, no cause of action survives to continue this writ petition and by lapse of time, this writ petition has become infructuous. Counsel submitted that even otherwise also, the controversy involved in this writ petition has already been decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11973/2008 (Smt. Nanchi Devi & Ors. Vs. R.R.V.P.N.L.) on 18.03.2009. Counsel submitted that this writ petition is liable to be rejected as per the decision rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Nanchi Devi (supra).

¶24

Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the respondents and looking to the fact that the electric pole/high tension line has already been installed in the year 2009 itself, this Court does not deem it just and proper to interfere with the matter.

¶25

Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶26

All application(s) (pending, if any) also stand dismissed.

¶27

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶28

MR/62

Shyam Singh v. Raj Rajya Vidyut Pra Nigam Andors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Singh v. Raj Rajya Vidyut Pra Nigam Andors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neha Yadav D/O Devender Kumar, W/O Prashant Vs State of Rajasthan

Subhash Chand Vs Chittar and Ors.

Nirmal Kumar Kodwani Vs Adj, Kishangarh, Ajmer

Satish Chand Tiwari Vs Addi District and Session Ors.

Smt Lachami Devi Vs Ass Engineer a v v N Ltd. and a

Smt Maya Davi Vs State Panchayati Raj Dep Ors.