The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the action of the respondents in initiating proceedings for the acquisition of a portion of his property. The acquisition is for the purpose of installing a High Tension Tower. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the tower is already installed in another property but, it is proposed to be shifted to the property of the petitioner at the instance of the owner of the said property.
2. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent disputes the contentions of the counsel for the petitioner. According to the 5th respondent, the shifting of the tower has been necessitated because of the construction of the Metro Rail which passes close to the property. It was for the said purpose that notice has been issued to the petitioner. However, since the petitioner has opposed the shifting of the tower to his property, the only course open to the 5th respondent is to seek appropriate orders under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. According to the counsel, there would be no attempt to dispossess the petitioner of his property or to install the tower without obtaining necessary orders from the competent authority. The counsel also submits that the objections W.P.(C) No.22764 of 2014 2 of the petitioner to the location of the tower may also be left open to be inquired into by the competent authority under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act.
3. Senior counsel Sri.M.Ramesh Chander appears for the petitioner. Adv.Smt.Latha Krishnan appears for the 2nd respondent and Adv.Sri.Adv.Smt.M.U.Vijayalakshmi appears for the 1st respondent.
4. In view of the submissions noted above, it is sufficient that this writ petition is disposed of leaving the petitioner free to raise all his objections before the District Magistrate in the proceedings that are proposed to be initiated under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act.
This writ petition is therefore, disposed of directing the competent Officer under the 5th respondent to take necessary action to ensure that a reference made under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act to the District Magistrate for the purpose of deciding the objections of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The District Magistrate shall decide the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as all other interested parties, as expeditiously possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks W.P.(C) No.22764 of 2014 3 of the date receipt of the reference. Further action in the matter shall be pursued, only in accordance with the orders to be passed under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV