Niranjan Mondal v. The West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited And ORS

04.01.2021 Ct. No.23 pg.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE (Via Video Conference) WPA 10024 of 2020 Niranjan Mondal Vs.

The West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited & Ors.

Mr. Gouranga Kumar Das ... For the petitioner Mr. Rammohan Chattopadhyay ... For WBSEDCL The petitioner, in the instant writ petition, has raised a challenge against the proposed installation of an electric pole on the petitioner's agricultural land. The petitioner says that representations were made to the concerned Assistant Engineer and Station Manager but the same remained unadhered to.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner says that an electric pole has been installed on the petitioner's land. The petitioner is now aggrieved by installation of the electric pole.

On behalf of WBSEDCL, it is submitted that the electric pole was required to be erected for granting low tension electric connection to a large number of villagers in the locality.

After hearing the parties and considering the materials on record, I find that the petitioner's grievances can only be gone into by the concerned District Magistrate under the existing provisions of law.

The petitioner is permitted to make a representation before the District Magistrate, South 24Parganas (respondent no.2), within 25th January, 2021. In

the event, the petitioner files such representation within the time-frame provided, the concerned District Magistrate shall dispose of such representation within two months from the date of filing of the same by a reasoned order after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties. The District Magistrate shall also communicate the reasoned order to the parties within seven days from the date of passing of the same.

It is made clear that in the event the petitioner fails to make such representation within the time-frame provided, it will be open to WBSEDCL to proceed further with the proposed work which remains held up for the pendency of the writ petition.

Nothing remains further to be adjudicated in the writ petition and the same is accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.

Since I have not called for any affidavits, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, is to be given to the parties, upon compliance of necessary formalities.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)