S M RAO Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE controversy raised in these writ petitions centres on the right of respondents 2 and 3 to draw service line for supply of electrical energy to the 4th respondent.

(2.) ). The petitioners herein own various extents of land described in the writ petition in Siddedahalli Village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North. The 4th respondent is a Public Limited Company engaged in the manufacture of certain goods whose main consumers are Central and State Governments. As per Order No. DE 87 EEB 92 Bangalore, dt. 12th May, 1993 of the Government of Karnataka the 4th respondent was sanctioned supply of additional power to an extent 500 KVA from the 2nd respondent on the basis of the recommendation of the 38th High Power Co-ordination Committee at its meeting held on 29-3-1993. The second respondent issued work order Annexure-G dated 27-5-1994, directing the 4th respondent to draw 66 KV H. T. U. G. cables for a distance of 3 kms, in terms of the condition made mention therein and also in compliance with the statutory provisions including the Karnataka Electricity Supply Regulations, 1988. The petitioners while questioning this grant itself they also challenge the steps taken by the respondents to draw the service lines. They question the very formulation of the scheme for the supply of electricity to 4th respondent and as a successive steps taken for the implementation of the scheme. The grounds on which the challenge is sustained are many fold. They include mainly :

(3.) THE petitioners also complain that there has not been due publication of the scheme as required under Sections 28 and 29 of the Indian Electricity (Supply) Act. It is averred that yielding to the undue influence of various land owners the alignment of the electrical line was changed, to exclude their land and to include that of the petitioners.