IN THE HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Biswanath Somadder, Wanlura Diengdoh, JJ.
Meghalaya Energy Corporation Ltd. - Appellants
Vs.
Tokiwaio Blah - Respondent
W.A. No. 65 of 2016
Decided On : 19-02-2021
High Tension Power Transmission Line - Safety Measures - Forest and Environment Clearance - W.P. (C) No. 364 of 2014 - Summary: The court directed the Meghalaya Energy Corporation Ltd. to divert the tower and high tension wires through the reserve forest and remove the same from the petitioner's premises within four months. Alternatively, the MeECL could place the high tension wires underground while ensuring all security measures and precautions.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a high tension power transmission line passing over the land of the respondent/writ petitioner, particularly over a Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) godown within the property. The court directed the appellants to ensure the safety of the respondent/writ petitioner and explore alternate possibilities considering the presence of the LPG godown.
Finding of the Court:
The court modified the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, directing the MeECL to take safety measures and explore alternative options for the high tension power transmission line passing over the petitioner's land.
Issues: Safety of the respondent/writ petitioner in relation to the high tension power transmission line passing over the land and property, and the exploration of alternative measures by the MeECL.
Ratio Decidendi: The court focused on the safety of the respondent/writ petitioner and directed the MeECL to consider diverting the high tension wires through the reserve forest or placing them underground while ensuring all security measures and precautions.
Final Decision: The judgment and order of the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C). No. 364 of 2014 was modified, and the writ appeal was disposed of. The connected miscellaneous application, MC (WA) No. 64 of 2016, was also disposed of accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
Biswanath Somadder, J.
1. This appeal arises in respect of a judgment and order rendered by a learned Single Judge on 8th June, 2016, in W.P. (C) No. 364 of 2014 (Tokiwaio Blah v. Meghalaya Energy Corporation Ltd. represented by its Chairman, Lumjingshai, Shillong and Ors).
2. The appellants before us are the Meghalaya Energy Corporation Limited (for short, MeECL) along with its Managing Director and Assistant Executive Engineer, Shillong Electrical Sub-Division-II.
3. The operative portion of the judgment and order dated 8th June, 2016 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"The committee examined the option of entirely bypassing the inhabited areas. From the satellite image at Annexure 5, it is seen that the area to the west and north-west of Mawlai sub-station is sparsely inhabited and prima facie it appears that this route may be feasible. However, it was informed by MeECL that these areas are reserve forest land. Construction of transmission lines within forest areas requires clearance from the Forest and Environment Department. Normally, such clearances are given only if the work is in the public interest and if no other alternative route exists. There is no certainty that clearance from the Forest and Environment Department can be obtained. The committee has also not verified whether other portions of the alternative route would be free from objections from affected landowners. Since the city limits are expanding into these areas it is likely that there would be strong resistance to aligning any new lines in these areas. Feasibility of this option is therefore dependent on clearance/no-objection being obtained from the Forest and Environment Department and other prospectively affected land owners."
13. On perusal of the suggestion given by the Committee it appears that the tower as well as the high tension wires can be diverted through the reserve forest land for which requisite permission is required from the Forest Department. The respondents MeECL is hereby directed to divert the tower as well as the high tension wires through the reserve forest and to remove the same from the premises of the petitioner, within 4 (four) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. Another alternative measure which the MeECL can take is to place the high tension wires underground while taking all security measures and precaution."
4. A bare perusal of the impugned judgment and order dated 8th June, 2016, particularly paragraphs 12 and 13 thereof, which are reproduced hereinabove, reveals that the issue before the learned Single Judge was in respect of a high tension power transmission line passing over the land of the respondent/writ petitioner. The matter appears to have been heard at length before the learned Single Judge. It further appears that the learned Single Judge was pleased to constitute a two member Committee in terms of an earlier order dated 10th March, 2016, to survey the spot and submit a report before the Court within a certain time frame. The Committee report was duly examined by the learned Single Judge and the Committee report dated 29th March, 2016, appears to form the basis of the order of the learned Single Judge. However, while passing the impugned order, the learned Single Judge directed MeECL to divert the tower as well as the high tension wires through the reserve forest and to remove the same from the premises of the respondent/writ petitioner within four months from th
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the MeECL to ensure the safety of the respondent/writ petitioner in relation to the high tension power transmission line passi....
Judicial review in technical matters is limited; courts respect expert opinions in public interest unless serious procedural flaws exist.
Deviation in installation of high-tension transmission lines can be justified if adhering to established guidelines, and affected parties can seek compensation under legal provisions.
Judicial review of transmission line approvals under Telegraph Act limited to perversity or mala fides; defer to expert opinion in public interest.
The installation of high tension transmission lines over private property is governed by the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and the transmission licensee is obligated to do as little damage as possible ....
The authority under the Indian Telegraph Act has the right to lay transmission lines on private property, prioritizing public interest and following due process, including compensation for any damage....
The court upheld the authority of a transmission company to construct electric lines without landowner consent under relevant statutes, emphasizing public interest and necessity over individual prope....
The court considered the technical and practical constraints faced by the Grid Company in maintaining a straight line for the transmission line and the availability of a procedure for restitution or ....
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.