- (1.) The instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, has sought direction against respondent No.3 restraining them from constructing the school building underneath/beneath the High Voltage wire of 66 KV. It was alleged that digging for the foundation was going on for the purpose of constructing the school building which fell under the high voltage wires.
(2.) In response to notice of motion, having been issued, written statements have been filed by respondent Nos.1 and 4 i.e. the State of Haryana and District Town and Country Planner, Faridabad. A separate written statement has also been filed by respondent No.3, namely, Adhunik Educational & Cultural Welfare Society as well as by respondent No.2. The additional written statement has also been filed by respondent No.5 and the added respondent No.6. In the various orders passed by this Court violation of rule has been pointed out. On the last date of hearing i.e. on 14.05.2012 the following order was passed :- On 03.04.2012, this Court has issued comprehensive directions by asking respondent No.2 to refund either the money paid by respondent No.3 for the plot along with interest or should explore the possibility for allotment of a suitable alternative site to respondent No.3. The aforesaid course has been adopted on account of the reply filed by respondent No.5 which has been noticed in order dated 29.11.2011. A perusal of the order dated 29.11.2011 would show that construction of the school in proximity to the high tension wires would be patently violation of Rule 6 of the Work of Licence Rules, 2006 which has been framed under Section 176 read with sub Section 2 of Section 67 of the Electricity Act, 2003 because permitting of construction of boundary wall beneath high tension transmission line could endanger the precious life of human being and tinny tots who are coming to the schools. We have made observation that respondent No.2 would be at liberty to take necessary steps in view of the reply filed by respondent No.5. A pointed attention was drawn to the violation of Rule 80 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 which provides that where a high or extra high voltage overhead line passes above or adjacent to any building or part of a building it must have all clearance above the highest part of the building immediately under such line. The reply also suggests that high tension wire is of 66000 volts. The danger of such building during rainy season has also been depicted in the aforesaid order. Mr. Vipin Dey, Advocate appearing for Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate for HUDA/respondent No.2 has stated that the building has now come up. Be that as it may if any building has been construction in violation of the directions issued by this Court or by committing patent illegality which is endangering the human life, then necessary steps to comply with the law have to be taken which may include demolition of the building itself. Therefore, we direct respondents No.1 and 5 to flung into action immediately and issue notice to respondent No.5 . In the meanwhile, respondent No.3 shall not occupy the building nor permit any admission of the children in such school. The status report of the action taken be filed within two weeks by respondents No.1 and 5. List again on 30.05.2012.
(3.) Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, learned counsel for respondent No.3 has brought to our notice that the school is raising construction strictly in accordance with the rules and regulations and there is no violation in raising the construction. Mr. Aggarwal has also pointed out the school site has been allotted to respondent No.3 by HUDA-respondent No.2 and there are unauthorized constructions surroundings the school site. According to Mr. Aggarwal there is in fact mushrooming of illegal grabbing of land and construction of building is so high that it would violate the CEA Regulation 2010 made under Section 53 of the Electricity Act. Mr. Aggarwal on behalf of respondent No.3 states that the inspection report, filed by Shri Daya Nand, Executive Engineer, Electrical Inspectorate, Haryana, Faridabad (R6/1) on 19.04.2011, would be acceptable to respondent No.3 and respondent No.3 shall raise construction of the school building in accordance with the norms to which reference has been made by the Executive Engineer in his report. The report is self-speaking and we set out the same for a ready reference :- Inspection Report of Daya Nand Executive Engineer, Electrical Inspectorate Haryana, SCF-9, Sector-9, Faridabad. The site of construction of school building in Sector-21-D, Faridabad by Adhunik Educational and Cultural Welfare Society was inspected by the undersigned on 19.04.2011 and observed as under :- The 66 KV FCI, Palla, feeders Circuit No.1 & II (double circuit) line is an existing line since 1973 on the agricultural land as reported by Sh. Daya Chand Rohilla AEE, NH-3, HVPNL (Faridabad). Under this existing 66 KV line, the Adhunik Educational and Cultural Welfare Society has started construction work of boundary wall of the school building near tower No.130. While constructing boundary wall in U-shape around one of the legs (stubs) of the tower No.130, the Adhunik Educational and Cultural Welfare Society did not serve any notice to owner of the 66 KV line (i.e. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam) and executed the work without any consent of owner and thus violated rule-6 of The Works of Licensees Rules, 2006 framed under Section 176 read with sub section (2) of Section 67 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The vertical clearance of the line conductors from the boundary wall is adequate. On date of inspection, no building is being constructed under the existing overhead line. Hence the society has not violated the provisions of Rule 80 of the Indian Electricity Rule 1956 [ now regulation 61 of the Central Electricity Authority (Measures relating to Safety and Electricity Supply) Regulations, 2010]. However, if Adhunik Educational and Cultural Welfare Society constructs any building or play ground under the existing 66 KV line in future, it will be breached of regulation 61 of the Central Electricity Authority (Measures relating to safety and Electric Supply) Regulations, 2010 and will not be safe. It is also stated that Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 stand repealed under Section 185 (2) (c) of the Electricity Act, 2003 on notification of the new CEA Regulations, 2010 made under Section 53 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and published in the Extraordinary Gazette of India on 24 th , Sept, 2010. The Regulation No.61 is reproduced as under :- 1. An overhead line shall not cross over an existing building as far as possible and no building shall be constructed under an existing overhead line. 2. Where an overhead line of voltage exceeding 650 V passes above or adjacent to any building or part of a building, it shall have on the basis of maximum sag a vertical clearance above the highest part of the building immediately under such line, of not less than :- (i) for lines of voltage exceeding 650 Volts = 3.7 meters upto and including 33,000 Volts. (ii) for lines of voltages exceeding 33 KV = 3.7 meters plus 0.30 meter for every additional 33,000 volts or part thereof. 3. The horizontal clearance between the nearest conductor and any part of such building shall, on the bases of maximum deflection due to wind pressure, be not less than:- (i) For lines of voltage exceeding 650 V =1.2 meters upto and including 11,000 volts. (ii) For lines of voltage exceeding 11,000 V =2.0 meters and upto and including 33,000 V (iii) For lines of voltages exceeding 33 KV =2.0 meters plus 0.3 meter for every additional 33 KV or part thereof. Dated :19/04/2011 Sd/- (Daya Nand) ;