IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA, D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, JJ.
Power Grid Corporation of India rep. By its General Manager - Appellant
Versus
S. Sagayamarsan & Ors. - Respondents
WA No. 1439 of 2023 & WP No. 12237/2023
Decided On : 02-02-2024
Indian Telegraph Act - Compensation Dispute - The court quashed the order of the learned Single Judge and the District Collector, Tiruvallur, and directed the claimant to file an application before the concerned District Judge as provided under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act.
Fact of the Case:
The claimant filed a writ petition seeking direction to determine compensation for the erection of a grid tower and laying of an electric line from his field. The District Collector determined the compensation amount, which was challenged by the Power Grid Corporation of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court quashed the orders of the learned Single Judge and the District Collector, directing the claimant to file an application before the District Judge as per Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act.
Issues: Dispute over compensation determination, jurisdiction of the District Judge, and authority of the District Collector to determine compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the case of Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Century Textiles and Industries Ltd and others, [(2017) 5 SCC 143], which held that the authority to determine compensation vests with the District Judge as per Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act.
Final Decision: The writ appeal and writ petition were allowed, and the claimant was directed to file an application before the District Judge. The parties would be governed by the decision rendered by the District Judge.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.02.2022 in WP No.33312/2014. Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings bearing Rc.No.5736/2023/M2 dated 26.03.2023 on the file of 1st respondent and quash the same.)
COMMON JUDGMENT
Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, C. J.
1. We have heard Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor- General, for Power Grid Corporation of India, Mr.R.Chittibabu, learned counsel for the private respondent and Mr.A.Edwin Prabhakar, learned State Government Pleader, for the District Collector, Tiruvallur District.
2. Mr.S.Sagayamarsan/private respondent filed a writ petition bearing No.33312/2014, for a direction as against the District Collector, to determine the compensation for the erection of grid tower and laying of an electric line from his field. The learned Single Judge directed the District Collector, Tiruvallur District, to fix compensation amount and pass appropriate orders.
3. After the order was passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition filed by S.Sagayamarsan, the District Collector, Tiruvallur District, determined the compensation amount.
4. WP No.12237/2023 is filed by the Power Grid Corporation of India, challenging the amount of compensation determined by the District Collector, whereas WA No.1439 of 2023 is filed by the said Corporation challenging the order of the learned Single Judge directing the District Collector to decide the compensation amount.
5. Learned Additional Solicitor-General submits that under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, if there is a dispute with regard to compensation, then the jurisdiction vests with the District Judge. The District Collector has no power to determine the compensation amount.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant/private respondent, submits that pursuant to the order of the learned Single Judge, the District Collector, Tiruvallur has already determined the compensation amount and that the claimant is entitled for the said compensation amount.
7. The matter in issue is no longer res integra. The Apex Court, in the case of Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Century Textiles and Industries Ltd and others, [(2017) 5 SCC 143], held that it is only the District Judge who has authority to determine the compensation amount. The relevant paragraph reads as under:
“27. At this stage, we deal with the direction of the Division Bench regarding compensation payable to the writ petitioner, or for that matter to the State Government. In the first instance, no such claim was laid by the writ petitioner in the writ petition or by the State Government before the High Court. Furthermore, the High Court could not have given this task to the District Collector, which is contrary to the provisions of Section 16(C) of the Telegraph Act, 1885 which are extended to laying down of electricity lines. As per the provision, such an authority vests with the District Judge.”
8. In light of the above, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No.33312/2014 dated 22.02.2022 and the order passed by the District Collector, dated 26.03.2023, impugned in WP No.12237/2023 are quashed and set aside.
9. The claimant/Mr.S.Sagayamarsan is at liberty to file claim/ application before the concerned District Judge, as provided under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act. The application may be filed by the claimant, within one month from today.
10. After the application of 16(3) of Telegraph Act is filed by the claimant, he is entitled to withdraw Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) deposited before the District Collector, by the Power Grid Corporation of India, upon submitting the proof of application. The remaining amount is allowed to be withdrawn by the Power Grid Corporation of India. The amount withdrawn by the claimant would
AI
The authority to determine compensation for disputes under the Indian Telegraph Act vests with the District Judge as per Section 16(3) of the Act.
Only the District Judge has the authority to determine compensation sufficiency under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.
The District Judge has exclusive jurisdiction to determine compensation claims under the Telegraph Act, and petitioners must pursue this remedy instead of filing a writ petition.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a transmission licensee, constituted as a Telegraph Authority, has the statutory power to determine compensation for laying transmission lines....
Writ petitioners must substantiate claims of inadequate compensation and approach the appropriate jurisdiction for disputes related to compensation under the Indian Telegraph Act.
An Additional District Judge is deemed a District Judge for jurisdictional purposes under the Indian Telegraph Act, allowing them to determine compensation.
The Court established that landowners have the right to seek compensation for land acquired under the Electricity Act and the Indian Telegraph Act, and disputes regarding compensation should be addre....
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.