The court dismissed a writ petition challenging the legality of electricity pole erection work after the respondent admitted dropping the project and arranging supply via government lands.
Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT
WRIT PETITION No.22025 of 2005
ORDER:
Heard Sri M.V.S.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri T.Janak Raj for respondents.
The petitioners pray for Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in digging pits for erection of poles for supply of electricity to 4th respondent in Sy.Nos.91/C3, 109/B2, 111/1B and 110/1 of Kakuturu Village, Venkatachalam Satram Mandal, Nellore District, as illegal and contrary to law.
The case of petitioners is that the respondents are under obligation to acquire land, pay compensation and erect poles in the lands referred to above.
The respondents filed counter affidavit and the operative portion reads as follows:-
“It is submitted that the said work started by the 3rd respondent after getting sanctioned by higher authorities and depositing the estimated amount by the 4th respondent herein.
It is submitted that though this respondent is having right to erect poles in the patta lands this respondent proposed to erect the lines in another way i.e., side of Donka which is in Government Porambok lands. Hence the proposed work for erection of poles in the petitioners survey Nos.91/C3, 109/B2, 111/1B and 110/1 is dropped and proposed to give supply to the lands of 4th respondent is another way which is situated in Government Poramnok lands, which was not in convenience to any other land owners.”
Having regard to the stand taken in the counter affidavit, counsel for petitioners does not press the prayer in the instant writ
petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_____________ S. V. BHATT, J
Dt: 10-06-2016 Prv
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT
WRIT PETITION No.22025 of 2005
10-06-2016
Prv
Petitioners
Respondents (Electricity Board)
S.V. Bhatt
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
