IMPORTANT POINT
An authority's lack of jurisdiction to issue a restraining order under the Indian Telegraph Act invalidates the order and any actions taken under it, but public interest may preclude the removal of completed works.

JUDGMENT

A.S. Chandurkar, J. - RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The question that arises for consideration in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is what would be the effect of work of laying transmission towers under provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, (for short, ''Act of 1885'), being carried out on the strength of a restraint order passed under Section 16(2) of the Act of 1885, which order is subsequently revoked as having been issued without jurisdiction?

3. The facts lie in a narrow compass. The 2nd respondent - Kharghar Vikhroli Transmission Ltd. ('KVTL) is a licensee under Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, 'Act of 2003') and is empowered to transmit electricity in terms of the Transmission License issued to it. KVTL was granted the work of setting up a 400 KV Receiving Station and laying of associated transmission towers for strengthening the Mumbai Transmission System. After obtaining all requisite permissions, including the leave of this Court, as required by paragraph 83(viii) of the directions issued in Public Interest Litigation No.87 of 2006 (Bombay Environmental Action Group and Anr Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.), KVTL commenced the said work. It was required to install forty-seven transmission towers, out of which seven towers were located on the lands leased in favour of the petitioner. An area to the extent of 1,250 sq.mtrs. was to be affected by the five towers to be erected. There being an obstruction caused by the petitioner while undertaking the work of laying down the transmission towers, KVTL approached the office of the Resident Deputy Collector and Additional District Magistrate under Section 16 of the Act of 1885. On 3rd May 2023, the Resident Deputy Collector and Additional District Magistrate passed a prohibitive order against the petitioner restraining him from causing any obstruction when the aforesaid work was to be undertaken. An opportunity was granted to the petitioner to put-forth his say on 17th May 2023. This order is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition that was filed on 9th May 2023.

4. The learned counsel for the parties were heard on the issue of grant of interim relief. This Court by its interim order dated 4th July 2023 observed that it was necessary for the District Magistrate while passing an order under Section 16(1) of the Act of 1885 to hear such person likely to be affected by that order. Thus, while refusing to restrain KVTL from undertaking the work in question on the ground that the work that was being carried out was in public interest and that the same was likely to affect only 1,250 sq.mtrs. of the lands claimed by the petitioner, an opportunity of hearing the petitioner under Section 16(1) of the Act of 1885 came to be granted.

5. Pursuant to the interim order dated 4th July 2023, the Collector and District Magistrate, Mumbai Suburban District heard the petitioner in the light of his contention that the Resident Deputy Collector and Additional District Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass the order dated 3 rd May 2023. The Collector and District Magistrate passed an order on 26 th June 2023 holding that the Resident Deputy Collector and Additional District Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass the said order on 3rd May 2023. Hence, the order dated 3rd May 2023 came to be revoked by the Collector and District Magistrate. This fact has been brought on record by the petitioner in his affidavit-in-rejoinder.

6. Mr. Shyam Mehta, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the entire premise on the basis of which KVTL carried out the work of laying down the transmission towers on the lands in which the petitioner had interest was without any authority of law. The petitioner was restrained by the order passed under Section 16(2) of the Act of 1885 from causing any obstruction. The prohibitive order dated 3 rd May 2023 passe