UHBVNL vs Chamela Ram

JUDGMENT :- 1. Petitioner herein which was the Opposite Party before the District Forum has filed this Revision Petition against the order dated 20.7.2007 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh (in short, ''the State Commission '') in appeal No. 202/2007 whereby the State Commission has dismissed the appeal filed by the Petitioner. District Forum had allowed the complaint directing the Petitioner to remove the high tension wires passing over the roof of the house of the complainant and electric pole standing in the plot of the Complainant within six months at their own costs.

BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the high tension wires were passing over the roof of the house of the complainant and a pole was also standing in the plot adjoining to the house of the complainant in which he was to construct a room. Due to electric pole standing in the plot complainant was not able to raise construction in the said plot. There was a danger to the life and the property of the complainant due to the high tension wires. Complainant approached the Petitioner a number of times to remove the high tension wires and the electric pole standing in the adjoining plot but the Petitioner refused to remove the same unless the requisite charges were paid by the complainant. Aggrieved by this action, complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum. Petitioner, being served, put in appearance and filed its reply resisting the complaint,inter alia, on the grounds that the high tension wires were passing over roof of the house of the complainant for the last more than 43 years as per the rules and regulations of the Department; that the complainant had intentionally constructed the house beneath the high tension wires about 4-5 years back without obtaining permission from the Department; that the house of the complainant was situated outside the Lal Dora and as per the Rules and Regulations issued by the Department the complainant was required to make payment for removing the high tension wires and the electric pole; that the estimate for removing the high tension wires and electric pole was prepared and delivered to the complainant but the complainant did not deposit the charges.

AFTER going through the material placed on record and hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, District Forum held that the complainant was a poor person and he could not pay the charges for removing the electric line. Being a welfare State, it was duty of the Government to remove the electric line if there was any danger to the life and property to a person.

COMPLAINT was allowed and the Respondent Electricity Board was directed to remove the high tension wires passing over the roof of the house of the complainant and electric pole standing in the plot of the complainant within six months at their own costs failing which the complainant was put at liberty to initiate penal action under Section 27 of the Act against the Respondent. Petitioner, being aggrieved, filed the appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties at length.

LEARNED Counsel appearing for the Petitioner contends that Section 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 envisages a specific procedure to be complied with by the person who proposes to erect a building subsequent to the erection of an overhead line which would result in contravention of the provisions of Rules 77, 79 and 80 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956. Further Section 82 mandates a notice in writing by the person proposing to erect a building under a high tension wire, to the Petitioner Authority. The high tension wires had been laid 45 years ago and the complainant had constructed the house only about 4 to 5 years without giving any written notice to the department. He further submits that the Fora below had failed to appreciate that the house of the complainant was situated outside the limits of Lal Dora and as per the Notification dated 25.5.2000, Government of Haryana had taken a decision that shifting of high tension wires falling beyond Lal Dora was to be done only on deposit of cost of shifting the wires. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent supports the orders passed by the Fora below. It is not disputed that the house of the Respondent is situated outside the limits of Lal Dora.

IT is also not in dispute that the high tension wires were passing over the land on which Respondent had constructed the house and an electric pole was also standing in the adjoining plot prior to the construction of the house by the Respondent. As per the Rules and Regulations of the Department, the Respondent was required to pay the charges for removing the high tension wires. The said Rule reads as under: "The Matter Has Been Reviewed At The Govt.Of Haryana Level And It Has Been Decided That Shifting Of Lt/Ht Lines Falling Beyond Lal Lakir Dora Is To Be Done If The Cost Is Deposited By The Beneficiaries."

Petitioner Board in terms of the existing Rules prepared and delivered the estimate of removing the electric line to the Complainant which is as under: New Material required for 11 KV Line S. Description Quantity Rate Amt. No Rs. Rs 1. PCC Pole 9 Mtrs 3 No. 999 2,970 2. Stay Set Comp. 8 No. 180 1,440 3. V. Shopx Arans 3 + 4 x 107 450 3,150 No. 4. 11 KV Disc. 6 + 6 + 6 210 3,780 1/2 Insulator 1/2 5. 11 KV Line filing 18 x 10 60 1080 6. Elect for stay 8 No. 40 320 1/2 340 7. MS Flat 20 Kg. 17 340 8. MS Channel 100 x 50 x 620 17 340 kg. 9. MS Angle Aro . 10 kg. 17 9,500 10. ACSR No. 3 500 mtr. 19 520 1/2 SWG 1/2 11. GSL No. 8 SWG 20 kg. 26 520 12. MS Nuts and Bolts 10 kg. 27 270 13. 11 KV line 9 No. 35 315 1/2 insulator 1/2 14. 11 KV line only 9 No. 25 225 15. 11 KV Cop 3 No. 48 144 1/2 Helper 1/2 16. Stay wire 7/8 1/2 80 Kg. 29 2,320 1/2 1/2 TOTAL 27,574 1/2 Sundries to Cable 116 1/2 Conligu 11 270 1/2 Transp 2 1/2% 675 1/2 Labour Charges 5,596 1/2 Total 34,231 1/2 Add 21% Deptt. Charges 7,188 1/2 Total 1/2 41,419 1/2

AS per the Rules, the Petitioner Electricity Board was justified in demanding the charges from the Respondent for shifting the high tension wires and the electric pole. We also find substance in the contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner that as per Section 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956, the complainant was required to send a prior written notice to the Petitioner before starting the construction of his house directly beneath the high tension wires. Section 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 reads as under: "82. Erection of or alteration to buildings, structures, flood banks and elevation of roads - (1) If at any time subsequent to the erection of an overhead line (whether covered with insulating material or bare), any person proposes to erect a new building or structure or flood bank or to raise any road level or to carry out any other type of work whether permanent or temporary or to make in or upon any building, or structure or flood bank or road, any permanent or temporary addition or alteration, he and the contractor whom he employs to carry out the erection, addition or alteration, shall if such work, building, structure, flood bank, road or additions and alterations, thereto, would, during or after the construction result in contravention of any of the provisions of Rule 77, 79 or 80, give notice in writing of his intention to the supplier and to the Inspector and shall furnish therewith a scale drawing showing the proposed building, structure, flood bank, road, any addition or alteration and scaffolding required during the construction. "

THE high tension wires had been laid 45 years ago and the house was constructed under the high tension wires about 4 to 5 years ago. Respondent had not given any prior written notice to the Petitioner in terms of Section 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 for obtaining permission for construction of the house. The Fora below have erred in not taking into consideration the above quoted provisions and allowing the complaint only on the ground that the Respondent was a poor person and the India being a welfare State, it is the duty of the Government to remove the electric line if there is any danger to the life and property of a person.

WE do not subscribe to the view taken by the Fora below. Since the house was situated outside the limits of the Lal Dora and was constructed subsequent to the laying down of the high tension wires, the Respondent was liable to pay the charges under Section 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 for removing the high tension wires and the electric pole. For the reasons stated above, the Revision Petition is allowed, orders of the Fora below are set aside and the complaint is dismissed. However, the Petitioner is directed to remove the high tension wires and the electric pole within a period of 15 days from the date of deposit of the requisite charges by the Respondent. Petition allowed.