Lawful actions by authorities for public benefit do not warrant exemplary damages unless there is an abuse of power.

Headnote:(A) Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 68(5) - Unauthorized construction obstructing high-tension electric line installation - The District Collector acted lawfully in demolishing unauthorized structures obstructing electricity transmission, thus denying claims for exemplary damages as the actions were within legal authority. (Paras 2-6)

(B) Public interest - In public projects, larger public interest prevails over individual grievances, making compensation under the Act the appropriate remedy rather than exemplary damages. (Paras 4-5)

Facts of the case:
The District Collector appealed against a Writ Court order granting exemplary damages to the respondent for alleged obstruction of high-tension electricity line installation due to unauthorized structures. The Collector's actions followed legal procedures to remove the obstruction.

Findings of Court:
The Writ Court's decision was set aside as the Collector's actions were lawful and followed due procedures.

Issues: Whether exemplary damages were justified when the authorities acted within their powers for public projects.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that lawful actions by authorities for public benefit do not warrant exemplary damages unless there is an abuse of power.

Result: Writ Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

S.M.Subramaniam, J.

Under assail is the order dated 13.09.2022 passed in W.P.No.17186 of 2015.

2. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District has instituted the present Intra Court Appeal mainly on the ground that compensation as admissible under the Indian Telegraph Act , 1885, is to be paid whenever high-tension electric line is commissioned in private properties. In respect of the properties belongs to the 1st respondent, District Collector in proceedings dated 14.03.2014 recorded the findings which reads as under:

“He has further stated that as per safety norms, there should not be any structures under the EHT lines. When the above one feeder charges, due to the presence of the above building within the induction limit, the line will either trip or power will pass through the building endangering to the lives moving there. It is further stated that the building is an unauthorized structure without proper approval. For that notices have been served to the building owner to demolish the building and also to the local body concerned to arrange for demolition of the structure vide their letter dated 30.07.2013 and 01.10.2013. But, the building has not been demolished yet and it was constructed with an ulterior motive to blocking the said EHT line passing through the land. It seems that erection of EHT line in the above said land was completed, but the generation of power is pending due to building raised underneath the EHT line.

The Superintendent Engineer has further stated that as North Chennai Thermal power station stage II is set to start generation of full capacity of 1200 MW shortly, the above one feeder is programmed to be energized by the month end. Hence he has requested to arrange for demolish the building urgently to energize the feeder.

I carefully examined the averments made by the Superintendent of Engineer, General construction Circle-II, Chennial-32 with connected records.

(1) 100% erection of EHT line had already been completed on the said land.

(2) Adjacent three feeders have already been energized, which is at present evacuating around 900 MW power from North Chennai Thermal power station stage II.

(3) This one feeder could not be energized due to construction of an unauthorized building raised exactly underneath the feeders.

(4) The development of efficient power transmission net work throughout the Country is more important for the welfare of the people and the nation.

(5) The above one feeder is programmed to be energized shortly to generate full capacity of 1200 MW from North Chennai Thermal power station stage II.

(6) Further delay in completing the project will have a strong bearing on the public exchequer and will not be in the interest of the public.

(7) It seems that the building was constructed with an ulterior motive to blocking the said EHT line passing through the land.

As per the provision of section 68(5) of the Electricity Act, 2003, it is clearly stated that, “Where any tree standing or lying near an overhead line or where any structure or other object which has been placed or has fallen near an overhead line subsequent to the placing of such line, interrupts or interferes with, or is likely to interrupt or interfere with, the conveyance or transmission of electricity or the accessibility of any works, an Executive Magistrate or authority specified by the Appropriate Government may, on the application of the licensee, cause the tree, structure or object to be removed or otherwise dealt with as he or it thinks fit” and Rule 79 to 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules , 1956, it is clearly states about the, building clearance of the high voltage lines.”

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellants would submit that despite a Civil Court decree, the 1st respondent breached an undertaking not to obstruct the installation of high-tension electric wires in the locality by constructing unauthorized structures. These unauthorised constructions are made in order to obstr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document