Erection of electricity posts on land without following statutory procedures infringes property rights, entitling affected parties to compensation under applicable rules.

JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Mr. S. Upadhyay, the learned counsel appering on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. B. Chowdhury, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. I have also heard Mr. D. Nath, the learned Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.5.

2. The Petitioner herein claims that he is the owner of 8 Bighas of land under Dag No.246 covered by Periodic Patta No.67 of Village Dhirai Majuli, Mouza Borsola in the District of Sonitpur, Assam.

3. Upon the said land belonging to the Petitioner, the Respondent APDCL Authorities have erected various pillars and thereby rendering 2 Bighas of land out of 8 Bighas useless. It is the case of the Petitioner that the same was done in the year 2016 and that too without following any provisions of law. The Petitioner had submitted representations as well as legal notices claiming compensation but the Respondents have not considered the same and it is under such circumstances, the Petitioner is compelled to approach this Court.

4. This Court vide an order dated 20.01.2020 issued notice.

5. The record reveals that an affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 wherein it is mentioned that the electricity line was constructed in the Dhirai Majuli area under UNIFIED FUND -2014-15 by the P&D Department, Government of Assam and the transformer was installed under the Chief Minister’s Power Supply Assurance Mission 2013-14 (CMPSAM) as a priority task for 100% electrification of rural areas. There is no denial to the fact that over the land of the Petitioner, certain posts have been erected. It is however mentioned in the said affidavit-in- opposition that the Petitioner is not entitled to the compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- as has been sought for in the instant petition.

6. This Court has duly heard the learned counsels for the parties and had perused the materials on record. The fact that over the Petitioner’s land, certain posts were erected is not denied. The fact that the Petitioner is entitled to compensation is also not denied. It is also very pertinent to observe that such actions which was taken up by the Respondent APDCL Authorities intrudes upon the Petitioner’s constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution as the same was not done by following the mandate of law.

7. It is also relevant to take note of the fact that at the time when the Respondents have erected certain posts in the land of the Petitioner by violating the Petitioner’s rights, the Central Government had framed a set of Rules namely the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 (for short ‘the Rules of 2006’) in exercise of powers under Section 176 (2)(e) as well as Section 67 (2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 (for short ‘the Act of 2003’). The said Rules of 2006 provided the manner in which steps are to be taken when posts are erected upon the lands belonging to person(s). Surprisingly, no such steps were taken by the Respondents herein. Rule 13 of the Rules of 2006 provided that the determination and payment of compensation to the affected persons to be paid by the licensees for making default in complying with any of the provisions of the Rules of 2006. No steps in that regard were also taken by the Respondents herein.

8. It is also very pertinent to take note of that in the lines of the Rules of 2006, the State of Assam in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 180(2)(b) as well as Section 67 (2) of the Act of 2003 had framed a set of Rules namely the Assam Electricity Works of Licenses Rules