The judgment establishes the requirement for transmission licensees to pay full compensation for any damage sustained by the landowner due to the work done by the licensee, as well as the exclusion of powers conferred by Section 164 of the 2003 act from Rule 3 of the 2006 Rules.

JUDGMENT

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. - The petitioner is an owner of the plot of land-in-question. The transmission licensee, that is, respondent no.1 started installing a tower of 400 KV Double Circuit Moose Transmission Line over the land of the petitioner without serving any notice or intimation to the petitioner.

2. On December 22, 2021, the petitioner raised objection in writing before the respondent-authorities in respect of installation of such tower.

3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid act of the transmission licensee, the present writ petition has been preferred, primarily seeking to stop installation of the tower.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner contends that, in terms of the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2006 Rules'), in particular Clause 3(1)(b) thereof, a licensee may fix any support of overhead line, etc., on any building or land.

5. However, as per the first proviso to Clause (b) of Rule 3(1) of the 2006 Rules, in case where the owner or occupier of the building or land raises objections, the licensee has to obtain permission in writing from the authorities stipulated therein.

6. The second proviso thereto provides that if at any time, the owner or occupier of any such building or land shows sufficient cause, the said authorities may, by order in writing, direct for any such works, support, stray or start to be removed or altered.

7. In the present case, it is argued, in view of the written objection raised by the petitioner, who claims to be the owner of the land, the transmission license ought to be restrained from installing the tower, since the forcible work of installation violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner and his legal rights as the owner of the property.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the transmission licensee, on the other hand, submits that sub-rule (4) of Rule 3 of the 2006 Rules stipulates that nothing contained in the said Rule shall affect the powers conferred upon any licensee under Section 164 of the Electricity act, 2003 (for the sake of brevity, 'the 2003 act').

9. That apart, it is contended that Rule 3 of the 2006 Rules pertains only to distribution licensees and not to transmission licenses, the latter being covered by Section 164 of the 2003 act, which has been excluded from the operation of Rule 3.

10. In order to examine the questions raised by the parties, Rule 3 is set out below:

'3. Licensee to carry out works.- (1) a licensee may -

(a) carry out works, lay down or place any electric supply line or other works in, through, or against, any building, or on, over or under any land whereon, whereover or whereunder any electric supply-line or works has not already been lawfully laid down or placed by such licensee, with the prior consent of the owner or occupier of any building or land;

(b) fix any support of overhead line or any stay or strut required for the purpose of securing in position any support of an overhead line on any building or land or having been so fixed, may alter such support:

Provided that in case where the owner or occupier of the building or land raises objections in respect of works to be carried out under this rule, the licensee shall obtain permission in writing from the District Magistrate or the Commissioner of Police or any other officer authorised by the State Government in this behalf, for carrying out the works:

Provided further that if at any time, the owner or occupier of any building or land on which any works have been carried out or any support of an overhead line, stay or strut has been fixed shows sufficient cause, the District Magistrate or the Commissioner of Police, or the officer authorised may by order in writing direct for any such works, support, stay or strut to be removed or altered.

(2) When making an order under sub-rule (1), the District Magistrate or the Commissioner of Police or the officer so authorised, as the case may be, shall fix , after considering the representations of the con