Disposed

Bomma Venkateswarlu v. The State of Telanagana

Telangana HC2 Sept 2024WP/17395/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the laying of 33/11 KV electricity lines on the petitioner's agricultural land. The Court directed the respondent divided to consider the petitioner's application for line realignment from his land to the road side, subject to the petitioner paying requisite charges and establishing technical feasibility within specified timelines.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent to consider realignment of electricity line to the road side from petitioner's land upon payment of charges and technical clearance.

Bomma Venkateswarlu Vs The State of Telanagana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

132521

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY. THE SECOND DAY OF SEPIEMBER TWO IHOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI^NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 17395 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Bomma Venkateswarlu, S/o Madar, Age 55^yrs Occ^{Business, R/o H.No 3-} 130 Mallikarjuna Nagar, Firzadiguda n/),^{Medipalli(M), tVedchal Malkajgiri} Dist

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by lts Principal Secretary^{Power & Energy} (department), Secretariate, Hyderabad

¶12

¶13

The Chief Managing Director, N.P.D.C.L, At^Warangal

¶14

3 The Divisional Engineer (Electrical) Thorrur^{Division, Mahabubbad Diskict}

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution^{of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^filed therewith,^{the High Court may be} pleased to issue a Writ order or direction more^particularly one^{in the nature of} WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction^{of respondentNo 3 to respondon} the petitioners representation dated. 241612024^{and to take steps to avoid further} damage to the petitioner lands an Extent^{of Ac. 3-06 Gunts in Sy. NO. 69b,77b'} 78b of Matedu Revenue^(V), Thorrur^{(M), MahabubbadDistrict in laying 33 /1 1} KV. Electricity Line towaords Polepally^{Sub- Stationis bad in law, illegal,} arbitrary and violating the natural^{justice hits} the^{Art 21 86 300,4 of the} Constitution of lndia CONSEQUENTLY^{direct the respondents to laid the} Electiricty Line beside the Road from^{Danthalpa{ly to polepaly Sub- Stationline} of 33 /1 1 KV. Electricity Line insted^{of cultivated fertility lands of the petitioner-}

¶17

¶18

IA NO :1 0F 2024

¶19

Petition under Section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit^{filed in support of the petition,the High Court may be pleased to} directtherespondentstostopthelaidtheElectricityLinebesidetheRoadfrom Danthalpally to^{polepaly Sub- Station line of 33 / 11 KV Electricity Line from the} cultivating fertility^{lands of the petitioner}

¶20

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:M/s. G.V.S.S' SRUTHI}

¶21

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.1: ASST' GP FOR ENERGY}

¶22

Counsel for the^{Respondent No.2& 3: SRI ZAKIR ALI DANISH'SC FOR NPDCL}

¶23

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶24

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶25

P o 3 f o2

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Heard Sri G.V.S.S, Sruthi, learned counset appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government pleader for power and Energy, appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned counsel for the respondent Nos, 2 and 3.

¶28

The etit onera Droach the Court seekin q

¶29

Draver as under:

¶30

' .... . to issue an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent No.3 to respond on the petitioner,s representated dated 24.06.2024 and to take steps to avoid further damage to the petitioner lands an extent of Ac.3.06 guntas in Sy.No.69b, 77b, 7Bb of Matedu Revenue Village, Thorrur Mandal, Mahabubbad District in laying 33/lI KV electricity Line towards Polepally Sub-station is bad in law, illegat, arbitrary and violating the natural justice and hits the Articles 2L and 3O0A of the Constitution of India, conseguenuy direct the respondents to lay the Electricity Line beside the road from

'>'4

{-"i

wP t7i95 2024

Danthalpally to Polepally Sub-Station line of 33/11, KV Electricity Line instead of cultivated fertility lands of the petitioner and to pass...".

¶36

It is the speciFic case of the petitioner, that the petitioner made a representation dated 24.06.2024 before the 3'd respondent requesting them to stop the Electricity Line and not dig any pits in the land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.3.06 guntas in Sy.No.69b, 77b, 78b of Matedu Revenue Village, Thorrur Mandal, Mahabubbad District and further to lay the line from beside the road, so that no harm would be caused to any farmers. In spite of the petitioner's representation dated 24.06.2024 the respondents through their contractors proceeded with the works. Aggrieved by the action of the 3'd respondent, the present writ petition is filed.

¶37

Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 places reliance on para No.4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.3 and contends that if the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the requisite fee pertaining to the expenses likely to be incurred and subject to technical feasibility the

¶38

-) wP t7t9i lot-l

¶39

request of the petitioner for realignment of the said subject electricity line would be considered.

¶40

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on instructions submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to bear all the expenses likely to be incurred including the requisite fee for the said purpose.

¶41

PERUSED THE RECORD

¶42

6. Coun r affidavit filed on be alf of reso ondent

¶43

No.3 in oarticular oara No.4 reads as under:

¶44

*4. It is further submitted that, from the above stated facts, it is thus clear that the 33/KV lines was erected by conducting proper survey and by ascertaining the technical feasibility of level of alignment to make sure that in case of any gale and wind the lines under poles shall not be disturbed and cause any inconvenience to the human beings. In so far as the contention of the petitioner that after laying the lines he is not able to cultivate his land is also not tenable as the poles erected covers only one feet of land. In fact, for providing of free agricultural power supply to the petitioner fields, LT Iine has crossed other neighbours land. Therefore, the petitioner

¶45

¶46

wP 17195²⁰²⁴

¶47

cannot^{claim the benefit of free agriculturalLT} power supply^{atone hand and on the other} hand raise^{objection for laying of 33 KV line for} better^{and reliable power supply to the villagers} and further^{contentionof the petitioner that the} lines has^{been laid in petitioner'sland to help the} contractor^{is also not tenable'As such' there is} no merit^{in the writ petitionand the same is liable} to be dismissed".

¶48

7, Taking into^{consideration the submissionsmade} by the^{learned counsel appearlngon behalf of the} petitioner and^{the learned Standing Counselappearing} on behalf^{of the respondentNos'2 and 3 and duly} considering^{the facts and circumstancesof the present} case, it^{is directedthat upon the petitionerpaying the} requisite^{charges for the purposeof free alignment of} theelectricitylineeffectinglinespassingthroughthe Ac.3.O6^guntasin to an extent^of petitioner's^land 7Ab of^Matedu Revenue^Village, Sy.No.69b,^77b, Mahabubbad^{District anduPon the} Thorrur Mandal, technicalfeasibilityofthesaidproposalasputforthby the petitioner^{indicatingthe specificplace where the} realignment^{could be made relocatingthe subiect pole}

¶49

¶50

wP r7i9i 102.t

¶51

and the electricity land, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the respondent No.3 shall consider the request of the petitioner as put forth by him in the representation dated 24.O6.2O24 and initiate appropriate action within two (O2) weeks, thereafter subject to the technical feasibility of the same.

¶52

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs,

¶53

M iscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, sha ll stand closed. SDI.^{K. AMMAJI}

¶54

AsslsrAiliREGlsrRAR / ITTRUE^COPY// \. SECTION^OFFICER

¶55

¶56

i ffi*'ffi1wffi$guh$,*ip.g1;filh,, BN GJP v.-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0210912024

ORDER

WP.No.17395 of 2024

'r ir $
I' ;) (f
2 7 OTC 2W n
\ z :l
\i'L
<br>

¶62

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶63

.e8A
10
%-"

¶64

Bomma Venkateswarlu v. The State of Telanagana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bomma Venkateswarlu v. The State of Telanagana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Telangana Aare Marathi Sankshema Sangham Vs The State of Telangana

Sandeep Agarwal Vs Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd. (Tsiic)

Ambati Durga Koteswari Vs The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary

Sri. K.B.v.Narayana Vs Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

M/S. Shrinath Rotopack (P) Ltd. Vs Andhra Pradesh Eleltricity Regulatory commission

M/S. Hindoil Industries (Rrs 961) Ida Kattedan, Vs Andhra Pradesh Eleltricity Regulatory