Mr Ganesh Panambur v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

ORDER INCLUDING WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED

21.01.2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 IN CR. NO.

57/2024/602702/C9 FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, VIDE ANNEXURE-J ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL ORDER

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: "i. ISSUE a writ, direction or order including writ of CERTIORARI to set aside the impugned order dated

21.01.2025 passed by Respondent No.3 in CR. No. 57/2024/602702/C9 filed by Respondent No.2, vide 'ANNEXURE-K,' ii. ISSUE a writ, direction or order including writ of MANDAMUS to the Respondent No.2 to adhere to and follow the detailed Revenue Survey Report dated

11.08.2023 submitted by Assistant Commissioner, Mangalore Sub-Division & Nodal Officer, UKTL Project, Mangalore for the purpose of construction in so far as the Tower No.7 is concerned vide 'ANNEXURE-G'; iii. ISSUE a writ, direction or order including writ of MANDAMUS to directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 jointly and severally pay a compensation of

Rs.1,50,000/- [Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only] for violation of fundamental rights of Petitioner as guaranteed under Articles 14 of the Constitution of India; and iv. GRANT such other and further relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶2The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is in joint ownership and possession of land bearing Sy.No.62/14, totally measuring 33 cents, situated at Kadandale village, Moodabidri taluk, Dakshina Kannada District. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, for the purpose of constructing a high-tension power line, issued an official memorandum dated

21.05.2022 and thereafter published a paper notification dated

08.07.2022 calling for objections. Thereafter, the survey report was prepared. The petitioner raised an objection by addressing a letter dated 23.11.2023 to respondent No.2 herein. Respondent No.2 issued a reply dated 06.04.2024, admitting that the work for constructing Tower No.7 for the high-power transmission line is to be carried out in Survey No.62/4, which belongs to one Leelabai. After the further survey, the Assistant

Commissioner submitted a detailed revenue report dated

19.06.2024 depicting the extent of land for deciding land compensation. Respondent No.2 filed a petition under Section 16(1) of the Telegraph Act, 1885, and Section 164 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003, before respondent No.3 against the petitioner herein. It was dismissed by order dated 16.07.2024. Respondent No.2 filed a second petition on 05.11.2024 before respondent No.3 under Section 16(1) of the Telegraph Act, 1885, and Section 164 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003. The said application is filed falsely, averring that, as per the technical report and the survey conducted by the revenue department, the construction of Tower No.7 was sanctioned on land belonging to the petitioner herein, that is, Sy.No.62/14.

¶3It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.3, in a mechanical manner, without appreciating the check Survey Report and the detailed Revenue Survey Report dated

19.06.2024 submitted by Assistant Commissioner, Mangalore Sub-Division, and the Nodal Officer, UKTL Project, Mangalore, passed an order dated 21.01.2025 and, in addition, directed the provision of police protection and assistance from

the officers of the Revenue Department. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶4Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that the entire procedure followed by the respondent is contrary to the Telegraph Act, which applies to tower erection. It is further submitted that the Deputy Commissioner failed to consider the objection and, in the meantime, constructed the towers. At this stage, nothing remains for consideration in this writ petition. However, it is submitted that the entire action of the respondent is contrary to law. The petitioner may be permitted to avail himself of the remedies available to him.

¶5Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that they have completed laying the towers and have deposited the compensation amount of Rs.9,46,969.50 before the Jurisdictional District Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru, on 25.09.2026. Considering that the respondents have already laid the towers, this Court cannot revisit the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner at this stage. However, the petitioner submits that he will seek an appropriate remedy regarding the manner in which the respondents are proceeding against him.

¶6Accordingly, in the light of the above submission, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to avail an appropriate remedy, if any, in accordance with law. ii. All Pending IAs in this petition shall stand closed.

SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5 *AK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 15647 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: MR GANESH PANAMBUR AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, S/O LATE KANTHAPPA, R/AT 2-85, BOLANTHE AJJI MANE, BOLANTHE, NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL, KADANDALE, MOODIBIDRE TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT - 574 227. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BRIJESH KALAPPA PALACHANDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED (KPTCL). A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956. CIN U40109KA1999SGC025521. HAVING ITS CORPORATE OFFICE AT, KAVERI BHAVAN, K. G. ROAD, BENGALURU, by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA - 560 009. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. MAJOR PROJECT DIVISION, KPTCL. KAVOOR, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA, KARNATAKA - 575 015. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAKSHINA KANNADA. OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BUNDER, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA, KARNATAKA - 575 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND R2 SRI. PRAKASH MALLAPPA GANIGER, HCGP FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF HTE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT, DIRECTION OR