High Court of KeralaWP(C)/5428/2015disposed of

R.Jayaprakash v. Powergrid Corporation Of India

2015-02-20Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/1ST PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 5428 of 2015 (C) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------- R.JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 49 YEARS S/O. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, THEKKE MADOM, IRINGOLE P.O. PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM.

BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S):

------------------

1. M/S. POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, CHANDINI, PLOT NO. 190-B, MAVELIPURAM, KAKKANAD KOCHI - 682 030.

2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) POWERGRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, KAKKANAD KOCHI- 682 030.

3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) POWERGRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, CHEVARAMBALAM, KOZHIKODE - 17.

4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.R.RAJESH R BY SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI, STANDING COUNSEL FOR POWER GRID CORPORATION.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 5428 of 2015 (C) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 29/05/2014 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR.

EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED VALUATION OF THE LAND. EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06/08/2011 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE D.D DATED 18/01/2011 EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.

EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/02/2015 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE IST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

------------------------------ //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE.

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

--------------------- W.P (C) No.5428 of 2015 --------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner contends that he has received compensation under protest in respect of the trees cut as well as the land utilised for erecting the tower. The petitioner points out that he is yet to receive compensation for diminution in land value. This is on account of the fact that electricity lines have been drawn over his property.

2. The petitioner adds that even 20% of the land value accorded by the respondents have not been disbursed hitherto. The petitioner has in this regard submitted Ext.P6 representation to the respondents. I direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation with notice to the petitioner within one month. I make it clear that the petitioner is free to move the court under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 if aggrieved by the final compensation fixed.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.

nj.