Madras High Court
T.Kalaiselvi vs The District Collector on 20 April, 2021
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
T.Kalaiselvi ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector,
Coimbatore District
Coimbatore – 641 018.
2. Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation
(TANTRANSCO0
No.182, Dr.Subbarayan Road,
Tatabad, Coimbatore – 641 012.
Rep. By the Superintending Engineer. ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining
to the impugned order passed by the Respondent No.1 dated 28.12.2020 in
his reference Na.Ka.No.17663/2020/E2, quash the same to the extent it
deprives the Petitioner just and proper compensation towards the land loss
they have suffered on account of erection of heavy transmission towers and
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
lines by the Respondent No.2 on their land and consequently direct the
Respondents to determine and pay compensation on par with the rates fixed
by the Respondent No.1 in respect of the same/similar lands affected by the
towers and lines of Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd vide his order
dated 06.09.2019 in Na.Ka.No.18001/2019/E2.
For Petitioner :Mr.P.K.Rajagopal
For R1 :Mr.P.Chinnadurai, AGP
For R2 :Mr.Abdul Saleem
ORDER
According to the Petitioner, her predecessors-in-title viz.,
K.Kalamani, T.K.Nivetha, R.Gopalakrishnan and G.Poongodi along with
one P.Ganesa Murthy purchased an extent of 7 Acres of land in S.F.Nos.752
and 753/1 of Karumathampatti Village, Palladam Taluk, Tirupur District.
After purchase, they sold some extent of undivided shares in the said land to
S.Ajaykumar Jain, A.Divya Jain, P.Thiygarajan and the petitioner herein.
Thus, the petitioner along with P.Ganesa Murthy and other co-owners have
been in joint possession and enjoyment of the said land, till date.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
2.It is the further case of the petitioner that the Power Grid
Corporation of India Ltd (PGCIL) laid two big transmission towers carrying
power lines across the petitioner's land, without her consent and knowledge
in the year 2016. Similarly, the second respondent started the work of
putting up two big transmission towers and power lines across the
petitioner's land parallel to the PGCIL towers. Upon raising objection, the
first respondent passed an order on 22.06.2019 granting right of way / entry
into the petitioner's land to the second respondent for the purpose of putting
up the towers for laying 230 KV transmission lines from Arasur to Eengur.
In the said order, it was also directed that the second respondent should
calculate and pay compensation to the petitioner, as per G.O.Ms.No.63,
Energy Department, Dated 22.11.2017. In the mean while, the first
respondent by order dated 06.09.2017, determined the compensation in
respect of agricultural lands including the petitioner's land in S.No.753/1 in
which PGCIL erected transmission towers and power lines, as Rs.7,114.25
per sq.mt of land. Whereas, the first respondent by order dated 28.12.2020,
has determined the compensation at Rs.508.75 per sq.mt in respect of the
towers and lines erected and run by the second respondent, payable to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
petitioner, which is totally unreasonable, arbitrary and unjust.
3.Stoutly opposing the two different compensation determined by the
first respondent in respect of the similar lands, the petitioner has filed this
writ petition to quash the said order dated 28.12.2020 and consequently
direct the respondents to determine and pay compensation on par with the
rates fixed by the first respondent in respect of the same lands affected by
the towers and lines of PGCIL by order dated 06.09.2019.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to the provisions
under Section 10 (d) to Section 19 of the Indian Telegraphic Act and
Section 164 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003, submitted that the
compensation ought to have paid as per the prescribed norms, but it has not
been followed in this case.
5.Mr.Abdul Saleem, learned Standing Counsel taking notice for the
second respondent submitted that already compensation has been calculated,
as per the norms and if the petitioner is not satisfied with the same, she is at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
liberty to approach the Court concerned, by adducing the evidence before
the appropriate Court. He also relied upon the order of the Supreme Court in
Power Grid Corporation of India Limited v. Century Textiles and
Industries Limited and others [(2017) 5 SCC 143], wherein it was held as
follows:-
“27. At this stage, we deal with the direction of the
Division Bench regarding compensation payable to the
writ petitioner or for that matter to the State Government.
In the first instance, no such claim was laid by the writ
petitioner in the writ petition or by the State Government
before the High Court. Furthermore, the High Court could
not have given this task to the District Collector, which is
contrary to the provisions of Section 16(c) of the Telegraph
Act, 1885 which are extended to laying down of electricity
lines. As per this provision, such an authority vests with
the District Judge.
28. These are sufficient reasons to allow Civil
Appeal No.10951 of 2016 preferred by the Power Grid by
setting aside those directions. Ordered accordingly. We
make it clear that if the writ petitioner feels that it is
entitled to any compensation, the appropriate course of
action is to file a suit before the District Judge, concerned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
for this purpose. It would also be apt to point out at this
stage that the Central Government has framed guidelines
dated 15/10/2015 in this behalf which inter alia provide
that the issue of compensation may be resolved having
regard tot he mode and manner of assessment of
compensation as per the said guidelines. Therefore, it
would always be open to the writ petitioner to avail the
remedy as per the said guidelines.”
6. In view of the above cited judgment of the Supreme Court, this
writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to work out her
remedy before the appropriate forum, by raising all the contentions made
herein. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
20.04.2021
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
av
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
To
1. The District Collector,
Coimbatore District
Coimbatore – 641 018.
2. The Superintending Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Transmission Corporation
(TANTRANSCO)
No.182, Dr.Subbarayan Road,
Tatabad, Coimbatore – 641 012.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
av
W.P.No.8859 of 2021 &
W.M.P.No.9395 of 2021
20.04.2021
(4/5)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
