High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
P. Nachimuthu & Others
Versus
The District Collector Tiruppur District & Others
W.P. Nos.22967, 23243 to 23246 of 2011 & Connected Miscellaneous Petitions
Decided On :Decided on : 30-11-2011
Electricity Act - Transmission Towers - Sections 2(16), 2(48), 2(72), 10, 11, 67, 176, 180, 68, 183, 185 - The judgment discusses the legality of laying transmission towers over a public cart track and the applicability of various provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003. It emphasizes the exemption from obtaining a license for establishing dedicated transmission lines, the authority of appropriate government, and the necessity of prior approval for installing overhead lines. The court concludes that the petitioners' grievances are limited to the usage of the cart track and dismisses the writ petitions.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the dispute over laying transmission towers over a public cart track by a generating company for connecting it with the substation. The petitioners raised objections against the laying of towers, and the court had to determine the legality of the order granting a no objection certificate for the same.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners had locus standi to file the writ petitions but their objections were limited to the usage of the cart track. It held that the first respondent had applied his mind and passed appropriate orders, considering the interest of the general public. The court also emphasized the exemption from obtaining a license for establishing dedicated transmission lines and the necessity of prior approval for installing overhead lines.
Issues: The core issue involved whether the third respondent could be permitted to lay the transmission towers over a public cart track. The court also addressed the locus standi of the petitioners and the applicability of various provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, particularly regarding the exemption from obtaining a license for establishing dedicated transmission lines, the authority of appropriate government, and the necessity of prior approval for installing overhead lines. It emphasized that the petitioners' objections were limited to the usage of the cart track and that the first respondent had applied his mind and passed appropriate orders.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the petitioners' grievances were limited to the usage of the cart track and that the first respondent had applied his mind and passed appropriate orders. It also granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the first respondent to work out their rights, if affected, by considering the conditions imposed in the order impugned.
1. Even though, the interim applications are listed before me, by consent, the Writ Petitions themselves are taken up for the final hearing.
2. The core issue involved in all these Writ Petitions is as to whether the third respondent can be permitted to lay the transmission towers over a public cart track by providing dedicated transmission lines for the purpose of connecting it with the substation. Since the grievances of the petitioners in all the Writ Petitions are one and the same against the same respondents, they have been taken up together and a common order is passed.
3. In order to decide the issues involved in these five Writ Petitions, the factual matrix surrounding the case requires a proper narration.
4. Heard Shri.V.Raghavachari and Shri.N.Subramanian, learned counsels appearing for the petitioners and Shri.K.V.Dhanapalan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2, Shri.P.S.Raman, learned senior counsel appearing for the third respondent as well as Shri.Vijay Narayan, learned senior counsel appearing for the fourth respondent and perused the entire materials available on record.
Facts in brief:
5. The third respondent is a generating Company engaged in manufacture, erection and operation of wind turbines. The electricity generated by the third respondent is to be sold to the State Electricity Board at the rate of Rs.3.39/-per unit, after the commencement of production. The State Electricity Board has been purchasing the electricity for much higher price from the open market due to insufficient power as the State is facing a power crunch. As per the agreement entered into between the third respondent and the State Electricity authorities, the power generation produced by the third respondent will have to be connected to the sub-station. The third respondent has got exemption from obtaining a licence under the Act, namely, the Electricity Act, 2003 as per the Electricity [Removal of Difficulty] (fifth) Order, 2005. Permission has also been obtained from the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation wholly owned by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. When the third respondent made attempts to lay the towers and overhead lines through the private lands, objections have been raised by the owners. Therefore, an alternative route was envisaged, by which, it was decided to take the overhead lines by constructing towers which are six in numbers and through the government cart track along with its overhead lines.
6. The third respondent made an application to the first respondent, District Collector seeking a no objection certificate. After obtaining a no objection certificate from the local Panchayat, the second respondent made an inspection along with the Revenue Inspector, Village Administrative Officer and Village Assistant and thereafter, sent a report to the first respondent recommending for no objection certificate as there is no hindrance to use the cart track for taking men, cattle and vehicles. The third respondent has also completed the substantial work of erecting 43 towers excluding the six towers which are to be laid along with the government cart track. Objections from the public have been heard by the respondents 1 and 2 after issuing a public notice.
7. After considering the relevant records, particularly the recommendations made by the second respondent and the Revenue Divisional Officer as well as the objections, the first respondent has granted a no objection certificate for laying the towers with the overhead lines. The said order has been passed subject to the conditions mentioned therein. Accordingly, it is the responsibility of the third respondent in the event of any accident, it has to maintain the pathway without hindrance to the general public and the movement of vehicles and it will have to file a report to the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and the Revenue Department about the condition of the cart track in every six months. More importantly w
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.