Petitioners sought mandamus against planned erection of 400 KV transmission towers through their lands in Ranga Reddy District without notice or adequate compensation. Following an earlier order of the Court dated 23.09.2014 in W.P. No. 20089 of 2014 and counter-affidavit averments, the writ petition was dismissed without 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.
I
l32s2l
HIGH COURTFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTHDAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLEMRS JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION NO :16733oF 2015
Between:
...PET|T|ONERS
AND
e. n..iii'ii'Er""rtirJEngin""ra00 Kv, SD1/-1, It/etro Erragada' TG Transco' Hyderabad ...RESpoNDENTs
...RESpoNDENTs
petition under Article 226 of the constitution oflndia praying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writorder or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamusdeclaringtheillegalactionoftherespondentsplanningtoerect400kV transmission linesthrough the lands belonging tothe petitionersin Sy.Nos.148'l4gandl53ofMondiGourellivillageYacharammandalRangaReddy District withoutdue processof law or notice and without following rulesand regulationsregardingdistancebetweentransmissionlinesandnotpaying adequate compensationto the effected farmerslike petitioners coveringall the damages isillegal arbitraryand violation of Article 14'19'and 21 of lndian ConstitutionandprovisionsofElectricitylawsconsequentlydirecttherespondents topay adequatecompensation after proper assessmentmade by the revenue authoritiesfollowing the procedureinvoke after takinginto account the lands
i
valuesin future after erecting the 400 kv towers at the distance within therules and regulations.
I.A. NO:1OF2015(WP MP,NO: 2 1717 0F2015)
mstancesstated in Petitionunder Section'151 CPC praying that in the ctrcu bepleased To stay the affidavitfiled in support of the petition'the High Court may 148,149and 153of of constructionof 400 kv line on the Petitioners land in Sy Nos' without Paymentof MondiGourellivillageYacharammandalRangaReddyDistirct adequatecompensationpendingWrit petition'
Counsel forthe Petitioners: SRI KOONA REDDYANJI REDDY SC FOR ;ffi ;i iI.ii.,I ir"i p".a""tii""i-ro+ a o :s lrr'vt ttoo REDDY'
Counselfor the Respondent No's:GP FOR REVENUE
The Courtmade the following:ORDER
.. ,l:
HON,BLEMRSJUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA
ORDER:
HeardSri Kuna Reddy Aniireddy' learnedcounse I appearingon behalf of the petitioners' Sri R vinod Reddy,learned Standing Counsel forTSTRANSCO' appearingon behalf of respondent Nos'1 to4 and 6 andlearnedAssistant GovernmentPleaderfor Revenue appearingon behalf of respondentNo'5'
a pProachedthe Court seeking 2. The Petitioners
prayer asunder:
2 wP 16733 2015
Indian Constitution and provisions of Electricity laws consequently direct the respondents to pay adequate compensation after proper assessment made by the revenue authorities following the procedure invoke after taking into account the lands values in future after erecting the 400 KV towers at the distance within the rules and regulations and pass...".
4, It is represented by the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 23.09.2014 passed in W.P. No. 20089 of 2074.
wP 167332015
-)
PERUSEDTHERECORD
No.g is extractedhereunder:
"9. In viewof the to the observations madein the aforesaidJudgmentby the learned Single Judge of thisCourt, this Court finds that there is no provision inthe Act of 1885 which mandates prior notice or anopportunity of hearing to be provided to theowner/occupierof a premises affected by the layingof lines or posts and therefore'there is noquestionof such owner/occupierbeing put on notice ordemandingan opportunityof hearing before thegroundingof the scheme' Section17 postulates thatsuch a right would arise only after layingof the lines or postsand uponthe failure of the authorityconcerned to act upon a requisition to removeor relocate such lines or posts etc'
In thecircumstances,the impugned action of the respondenBcannot be held to be arbitrary' illegal orcontraryto the provisionsof the Act of oMa da u n 2003 onanY ground'Hen
f h H
4
wP 16733 2015
petitioners are not satisfied with the amount of compensation that waspaid to them. thev can aqitate for the enhancement by working out the appropriate remedy as available under law in case any damage is sustained to their property.
The writ petition is therefore devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. If any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed".
"6. It is submitted that the TS TRANSCO will be paying compensation as per the recommendation of the Revenue Authorities of the concerned District. The compensation amount will be paid to land owners by TS TRANSCO while executing the foundations, tower erections and stringing works on the line based on the proof of title to the land. The authorities have already issued letters dated 10.03.2015 to the petitioners and their brothers informing them of the eligible compensation. There
I
5
E
v/P 16733 2015
seems to be differences between thepetitioners and their brothers regarding the ownership of the land on which the transmission tower isgoing to be erected and the main intention ofthe petitioners seems to be to somehow stall the laying of the towers. The respondentshave replied to the legal notice dated 31-3-2015 and the samehasbeen received by them.
II
7, Taking into consideration theorder of this Court dated 23,09.2014passed in W.P' No. 20089 ot 2OL4 and the specific avermentsmade in th€ counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents2, 3, 4 and 6 in particular para Nos. 6, 7 and 8 referred toand extracted above, and the submissionsof Sri R Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel forTSTRANSCO,
I
w? 16733 2015
6
appearing onbehalfof respondent Nos'1 to 4 and 6 which isnot disputedby the learned counsel appearing onbehalfof the petitioners,this Court opines that theprayeras sought for by the petitioners cannot be grantedin favour of the petitioners and the writ petition is accordinglydismissed'However,there shall be no orderas to costs.
ASA sequel, the miscellaneouspetitions, if any, pendingin the WritPetition shall also standclosed'
\
SD/- N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT GISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC FFICER
To
i,FiEEEiiiELilTH#fl,,[H,:itlBi]ffi['i:d!ffi n"n",, Hvderabad. [OUT] 4 Two CD CoPies PSK. LS
L-
l
HIGH COURT
DATED:1810912024
ORDER
WP.No.16733of 2015
t 1HE S 14 r.
c ((t'
I C)
2 S r,l[/ 202t
il
a'.
rDa q
DISMISSINGTHE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS.
Y/-
Tt-f\l'1a
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether erection of a 400 KV transmission line over petitioners' lands without notice and with allegedly inadequate compensation was illegal and arbitrary.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P. No. 20089 ot 2014Relied on¶7
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gurram Vasudeva Reddy
Central Electricity Authority
Chief Engineer / Director, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad
Superintendent Engineer, 400 KV, Metro Erragada, Hyderabad
District Collector, R.R. District, Hyderabad
Executive Engineer, 400 KV, SDT-1, Metro Erragada, TG Transco, Hyderabad
Surepalli Nanda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
