IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION Nos.11440-11441/2019 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN:
1. A.D.KUMARA S/O LATE DODDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT ARALAPURA VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573234.
2. JAVAREGOWDA S/O LATE DODDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT ARALAPURA VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-34. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI K.C.PRATHEEP, ADV.) AND:
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN-34.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER [ELE] KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED MAJOR WORKS DIVISION B.M.ROAD, SANTHEPETE HASSAN-573201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.JYOTHI.M., AGA FOR R-1; SRI H.V.DEVARAJU, ADV. FOR R-2.) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT No.1 TO CONSIDER THE PETITION [ANNEXURE-C] AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW WITHIN ONE WEEK.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. It is the contention of the petitioners that they approached this Hon’ble Court in W.P.Nos.57869- 870/2014 against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Hassan District – respondent No.1 who had passed an order, allowing the application filed by respondent No.2, permitting the respondent No.2 to install new 66 KV electricity line in about 2.34 kilometers to Shettyhalli from the existing 66 KV line of Channarayapatna-Hirisave.
3. This Court in its order dated 13.01.2015, has observed thus:
“6. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, as far as possible, it is for the 1st respondent to draw 66 KV electricity line in the Government land which is available adjacent to the petitioners land. If not, the respondent-Authority to compensate the petitioners suitably in accordance with law. However, while drawing electricity line, the possible damages be avoided and also to minimize the encroachment as for as possible. It is also for the respondent-Authority to avoid lining of electricity at the existing route. It is also suggested to draw the electricity line on the Government land and also partly on the property belonging to the petitioners. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of.”
4. It is the grievance of the petitioners that despite the order passed by this Court as aforesaid, the respondent No.2 after four years from the date of the order of this Court, is trying to draw the electricity line on the existing routes which was the subject matter of the earlier writ petitions. Accordingly, a petition has been filed by them under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act before the Deputy Commissioner – respondent No.1 to direct the respondent No.2 to draw the electricity line in terms of the orders of this Court passed in W.P.Nos.57869-870/2014.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that no orders are yet passed by the respondent No.2 on the said petition. But the respondent No.2 is proceeding with the installation of 66 KV electricity line on the existing route which comes under the lands of the petitioners.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents supports the action initiated by the respondent No.2.
7. Considering the totality of circumstances of the case, this Court without going into the merits or demerits of the case, deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.1 – Deputy Commissioner to consider the petition at Annexure-C submitted by the petitioner and dispose of the same in accordance with law after hearing the parties, in an expedite manner in any event not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Ordered accordingly.
Till then, the respondent No.2 shall not proceed with the installation work of 66KV electricity line in the petitioners’ land.
Writ petitions stand disposed of in terms of the above.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.