Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 505
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Subramonium Prasad, J
J.C. FLOWERS ASSET RECONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDA & ORS. – Respondent
W.P.(C)-6501/2024
The court upheld the public interest in unobstructed access for electricity transmission lines, ruling that procedural objections do not override statutory powers under the Electricity Act.
Headnote:(A) Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 164 and 176(2)(e) - Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 - Challenge to alignment of transmission lines - Petitioner, an asset reconstruction company, sought to change the alignment of transmission lines over mortgaged property, claiming it would diminish property value - Respondent, Power Grid Corporation, argued alignment was decided after public notice and by technical experts - Court found no violation of procedure and upheld public interest in unobstructed access for transmission lines. (Paras 1-15)
(B) Public Interest - The court emphasized that unobstructed access for laying transmission lines is essential for public interest, overruling procedural objections. (Paras 12-15)
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner claimed that the alignment of transmission lines would adversely affect the value of mortgaged property intended for use as a motel, and that proper notice was not served regarding the alignment.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the alignment was decided by experts and that public notice was given, with no objections raised by the Petitioner or the previous mortgagee.
Issues: The main issues were whether the alignment of the transmission lines could be changed and whether proper notice was served to the affected parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the powers under the Electricity Act and the public interest in unobstructed access for transmission lines outweighed the procedural objections raised by the Petitioner.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
1. The Petitioner, an asset reconstruction company, has approached this Court for a direction to Respondent No.2 for changing the alignment/path and position of the electrical pole and high tension transmission line which is being built over the land pertaining to Khasra Nos.7/16 min (2-8) south side and 8/20/1 min (0-7) south side and other Khasras in the revenue estate of Village Khampur, New Delhi-110036 (hereinafter referred to as ―Subject Property‖).
2. The facts in brief indicate that Yes Bank Limited had extended credit facilities to five entities of one Presidium Group. Since the borrowers failed to make payments as demanded by Yes Bank, proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002 were initiated. Physical possession of the land which had been mortgaged to Yes Bank was taken under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Yes Bank vide an Assignment Agreement dated 16.12.2022 has assigned the debt to the Petitioner which as stated earlier is an asset reconstruction company. The Petitioner under the Agreement is in possession of the Subject Property and is trying to enforce its security interest to recover the outstanding amount due and payable against the Subject Property. The Respondent No.2/Power Grid Corporation of India (PGCI) is executing a 2x400KV D/C Maharani Bagh - Narela Line which forms part of the transmission scheme "Transmission system strengthening scheme for evacuation of power from solar energy zones in Rajasthan (8.1 GW) under phase-II G1 (Maharanibagh / Gopalpur - Narela 765/400 KV substation 400 KV interconnection)". The transmission scheme was approved on 23.01.2020 and high tension lines are being drawn.
3. It is the case of the Petitioner that if the transmission lines are drawn over the subject property which is in possession of the Petitioner, the value which the subject property could yield in an auction will be diminished which will be detrimental to the Petitioner. It is the case of the Petitioner that the alignment can be changed in order to minimize the damage that can be caused to the Petitioner. It is stated that the subject property which now stands mortgaged is intended to be used as a motel and the base of one of the transmission towers is proposed to be constructed in such a way that will make the subject property virtually not fit for being used as a motel. The Petitioner has tried to demonstrate that the tower site which is marked as AP-13 in the map is situated on the land which is in possession of the Petitioner and this particular tower deviates from the straight path between AP-12 and AP-14 which is the preceding and succeeding tower base. It is the case of the Petitioner that as depicted in the GSDL revenue map, the electric lines are not connected directly from point AP-14 to AP-12, instead a point AP-13 which is not forming a straight line and is of a longer distance, has been used. It is the case of the Petitioner that the same may have been done under undue influence of land-owners of the land with lines directly between AP-14 and AP-12. The alignment of the transmission line appears to have been changed and a longer route has been chosen despite availability of a straight route for erecting transmission poles.
4. It is further stated that the Petitioner which is in possession of the subject property since 16.12.2022 has not been put to any notice at all. It is also stated that Yes Bank came in the possession of the subject property in the year 2020 and they have also not been put to any notice regarding the laying of the transmission lines. It is the case of the Petitioner that the procedure that has been adopted by Respondent No.2 to raise the transmission lines is in violation of the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 which has been brought in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 176(2)(e) read with Section 67(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003 .
5. Per contra, it is the case
