SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ori) 340

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
S. Muralidhar, B.P. Routray, JJ.
Padmanav Patel & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Orissa & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1233 of 2011
Decided On : 08-03-2021

Advocates Appeared:
S. Mohanty, Advocate, P.K. Muduli, Advocate, P.K. Nayak, Advocate

The court's decision was influenced by the completion and functionality of the electric line, the failure of the villagers to substantiate their claims, and the analysis of the provisions of the Electricity Act.

Headnote:

Electricity Act - Villagers' opposition to power supply through agricultural lands - Sections 10, 16, 67, 68, 164 of Electricity Act discussed

Fact of the Case:

The villagers opposed the installation of a 33 KV electric line through their agricultural lands, citing endangerment to their lives and livelihood. They alleged that the line was meant for a company and not for public benefit. The court had passed an interim order to stop the power supply over the agricultural lands.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the construction and power supply through the electric line were completed and functional, and the villagers did not dispute this. The court also noted that the villagers failed to substantiate their claims of endangerment to their lives and livelihood. The court analyzed the provisions of the Electricity Act and found the villagers' allegations to be incorrect.

Issues: Opposition to power supply through agricultural lands, endangerment to lives and livelihood, alleged violation of Electricity Act provisions

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the construction and power supply through the electric line were completed and functional, and the villagers failed to substantiate their claims of endangerment to their lives and livelihood. The court also analyzed the provisions of the Electricity Act and found the villagers' allegations to be incorrect.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that it was without merit.

JUDGMENT

B.P. Routray, J. - The Petitioners, who are the villagers of Kumudapali and Dalki Bandhtekra in the district of Jharsuguda, are assailing the action of the Opposite Parties with a prayer to direct the Opposite Parties to stop power supply of 33 KV electric line through the agricultural lands of their village and further to prohibit Opposite Party No.5 in this regard.

2. It is stated by the Petitioners that the lands over which the electric line is proposed to run have neither been acquired nor any intimation has been given to the villagers for the purpose. It is their further case that installation of such electric line over the private lands of the villagers is violative of OERC Code and the same will endanger their lives and livelihood. They are in possession of the cultivable lands since the time of their forefathers and using the same for agricultural purpose. Concerning such forcible action of the Opposite Parties more particularly, Opposite Party No.5 though a FIR has been lodged before the Jharsuguda Police Station on 3rd October, 2010 and another representation was made to the Collector, Jharsuguda, still neither the Police nor the Collector did take any action. The Petitioners further asserts that they came to know from reliable source that, the proposed 33 KV electric line is specially meant for Vedanta Company and the public would be no way benefited out of it. There is an alternative way to take said 33 KV electric line through the village roads instead of taking the same straight way through the agricultural lands. It is also stated that the proposed construction of the electric line is violative of the provisions of Electricity Act and Rules.

3. Out of several Opposite Parties in the array, Opposite Party No.5- Vedanta Aluminium Limited and Opposite Party No.8-M/s. Sterlite Energy Limited are the main contesting Opposite Parties.

4. Opposite Party No.3-State of Orissa in Energy Department in their counter have stated that, there is a 400 KV electric line of M/s. Sterlite Energy Limited instead of 33 KV electric line, connecting to 400 KV Power Grid Corporation of India Limited has been constructed which is dedicated to evacuate power from its generating station to Power Grid Corporation of India Limited Grid. This being an interstate power generating station, prior permission of Ministry of Power, Government of India under Section 68 of the Electricity Act has been obtained vide Letter dated 1st September, 2010. The Chief Electrical Inspector to Government of India have also inspected the installation of LILO (Line-in-Line-Out) of 400 KV Rourkela-Raigarh transmission line vide Letter No.3, dated 8th February, 2011.

5. M/S. Sterlite Energy Ltd., who is Opposite Party No.8 and now known as Vedanta Limited (who was also arrayed as Opposite Party No.5) have filed their counter reply dated 2nd December, 2019. It is required to be stated here that though initially Opposite Party No.5 (Vedanta Aluminium Limited) has filed its counter on 13th March, 2011 by denying that, no construction of transmission lines was made by it, but it was by M/s. Sterlite Energy Limited, subsequently perhaps after acquisition of Sterlite Energy Limited which is now known as Vedanta Limited has filed a separate counter as aforestated on 2nd December, 2019.

    In the counter affidavit dated 2nd December, 2019, it is stated by Opposite Party No.5 that, it is a generating company within the meaning of Section 2 (28) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and in order to set up the Thermal Power Plant of 2400 MW, it received all statutory approvals from time to time. It has received prior approval from Government of India, Ministry of Power under Section 68 (1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 for construction of dedicated transmission line on 1st September, 2010 with permission for evacuation of power from 4x600 MW TPP (generating station) to the National Grid under Long Term Open Access. It has constructed the transmission line after obtaining prior consent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top