Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67131
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T.ASHA, J
I.Pradeep Divahar – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Tirunelveli – Respondent
W.P.(MD) No.25571 of 2025 | W.M.P(MD)Nos.20017 & 21935 of 2018
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s.H.Jasima Yasmin for M/s.Ajmal Associates
For the Respondents: Mr.A.Kannan, Mr.Jayesh B.Dolia, M/s.N.Varsha
Clearance and compensation requirements under the Indian Telegraphic Act are critical to legal compliance during installation of HT transmission lines.
Headnote:Statute Analysis: The petitioner invokes Article 226 of the Constitution requesting a Writ of Mandamus against respondents for installation of HT lines without compensation as per section 10(d) of the Indian Telegraphic Act, 1985. Facts of the Case: The petitioner contends unsafe installation of power transmission lines over his patta land located in Munanjipatti Village.
Findings of Court:
The Court notes that there is safety clearance and compensation has been specified under G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 30.10.2019.
Issues: The main question framed is whether the respondents can proceed without due compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court reasons that since safety regulations are met and compensation issues were previously addressed, the petitioner’s claims are legally unsound.
Result: This Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed regarding installation of transmission lines (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. no legal issue in safety clearance and compensatory measures (Para 3) |
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for the following relief :
“forbearing the Respondents from installing High-
Tension(HT) overhead electric transmission lines and Towers over and above the patta land of the Petitioner comprised in S.No.633/2C Munanjipatti Village, Nanguneri Taluk, Tirunelveli District without paying due compensation as provided under section 10(d) of the Indian Telegraphic Act, 1985 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.”
2. Today a vacate stay petition and counter affidavit have been filed by the respondents 2 and 3. The 4th respondent adopts the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd and 3rd respondents. In Paragraph No.8 of the counter affidavit, they have stated as follows :
8. It is further respectfully submitted that in compliance with the order passed by this Court, the 3rd respondent had summoned the 4th respondent, consequently, a joint inspection was conducted at the Tower locations 51/3 and 51/4 wherein the Tower No.51/4 is spotted in the petitioner's land and the same is 40 meters away from the open well in the alignment. The type of tower is DA +6 meter extension. Hence, the bottom conductor height shall be 28 meters level over the well from the ground level. Horizontal distance from the bottom conductor shall be 8.1 meters from the open well, thus there is no issues regarding the safety clearance as per the central Electricity Authority (Measures Relating to Safety and Electricity Supply) Regulations. The above inspection report has been duly communicated to the petitioner by the communication of the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in SR-II/TVL/TLC/PKTL/Court case/F-ED 023/2025, dated 25.08.2025 and informed that his representation was disposed of. Therefore, if at all any grievance over the same, the petitioner ought to have challenged the above proceedings, however without doing so, the petitioner has filed a mandamus with the very same prayer in the earlier writ petition and obstructs the work of the 3rd respondent which is bad in law or on facts.”
3. It clearly shows that the line is being laid well above the ground level maintaining the safety clearance. That apart, the respondents have also stated that the compensation payable is already set out in G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 30.10.2019 which would be payable to the land owner.
4. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
