Mostafa Mondal vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.

The writ petition has been filed complaining of forcible installation of pole such that overhead wires are strung across the roof of the writ petitioner’s house. The petitioner has complained that he has been completely prevented from accessing his roof. What is more alarming are the allegation in paragraphs 7, 8 and 10 of the writ petition which are set out hereinbelow :—

“7. Your petitioner states that after conversion, the petitioner constructed a building. The petitioner is a supporter of Opposition Party and under the instruction of the local Panchayat which is of the ruling party, the distribution company, since 2012 have been trying to install over-head electricity line on the property and house of the petitioner, which has been mentioned in earlier paragraph.

Your petitioner states that since 2012, he has made different representations to the respondent distribution company and requested the company not to install electricity line over the house of the petitioner.

Your petitioner states that on 31.08.2016, the petitioner again made a representation to the respondent authorities it was stated therein, that on 27.08.2016 some local people came to the house of the petitioner for forcefully installing the aforesaid electric line over the house of the petitioner without any prior intimation. Even when the petitioner restrained them from doing so they assaulted the petitioner and thereafter they forcefully installed the electric line. Soon after the incident the petitioner lodged a general diary before the Amdanga police station being G.D. No. 968. The respondents duly received the representations of the petitioner but no action regarding the mater has been taken by the respondents/distribution

company.”

Today Mr Chaudhuri appearing for the distribution licensee has produced instructions which were given to him by his client under a memo issued by the Superintending Engineer (E), Barasat RE Project, WBSEDCL which is taken on record. The work was undertaken under the rural electrification project under the RGGVY-XII Plan. One of the documents enclosed with the instructions is a letter dated November 4, 2016 from the competent officer of the distribution licensee which reads as follows:—

“Dear Sir, With refers to above subject matter and your letter, it is hereby informing you that after a lot of pressure by political people, Panchayat Member, Pradhan & also villagers of Jeerat Village, our labour contractor M/s RadhaKrishna Enterprise was compelled to draw stinging of 6 nos LT pole for providing few service connection there. These 6 nos poles were not erected by our labour in this project but all materials used including conductor are the property of

WBSEDCL.

Written documents from Panchayat Member & Pradhan are attached herewith.”

What is most shocking is a letter written by hand and signed by a Member of the Legislative Assembly for the said constituency where it has been clearly admitted that the said Hon’ble Member of the Legislative Assembly has purported to give permission to a contractor and subcontractor to do the electrical work of six naked poles stringing at the village with the local Panchayat Pradhan as well as local MLA. While such certificate may be required by the rural electrification scheme, the unfortunate fact is that the instructions under cover of the memo dated November 6, 2016 referred to above issued by the distribution licensee clearly mentions that the local MLA of Amdanga, Pradhan of Adhata Gram Panchayat and local villagers put pressure on local contractor engaged by the turnkey Agency, M/s IL&FS for drawing 220 volts overhead line over the disputed land over previously erected naked poles.

It was expressly stated in the instructions that ultimately under the compulsion and verbal clearance of local Gram Pradhan as well as MLA Amdanga Assembly on spot, in presence of mob (local villagers), 220 volts overhead line has been drawn over disputed land and erected poles for effecting service connection of above mentioned un-electrified households at the village of Jeerat near Awalsiddhi more on 27.08.2016.

Since the respondent-distribution licensee has admitted the statements contained in the writ petition and has gone further, there is nothing to be decided by the District Magistrate under the provisions of the Works of Licensee’s Rules, 2006. In the circumstances mentioned above, I am not very hopeful that the District Magistrate concerned would be in a position to withstand the combined political will of the local villagers and the elected representatives of the people, including the Gram Panchayat Pradhan and the Hon’ble Member of the Legislative Assembly. Such persons have not been arrayed in the writ petition. Therefore, no finding can be recorded as against them.

However, the distribution licensee, when it discharges statutory and public functions under the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, becomes an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and a person or authority under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is expected to act fairly and in accordance with law; merely because the writ petitioner has chosen to believe in an ideology which is opposed to that of the ruling dispensation, the fundamental rights to shelter, life with dignity and the constitutional right to property cannot be taken away without following procedures established by

law. Admittedly, the distribution licensee had not applied to the concerned District Magistrate under the first proviso to rule 3 of the Works of Licensee’s Rules, 2006 before proceeding to draw the lines over the roof of the petitioner in the teeth of his objections, therefore the act of the distribution licensee was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. The said act of electrification by drawing overhead wires over the rooftop of the petitioner was therefore a nullity.

It is unfortunate that the local people will have to be without electricity because of this act without jurisdiction on the part of the distribution licensee.

However, the rule of law requires that nullities are quashed and judicial review redresses the grievance of the petitioner in such a case. When the writ petition was instituted at that time the overhead line admittedly had been forcibly installed. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the distribution licensee to forthwith remove the overhead wires from above the rooftop of the writ petitioner and find alternative route to supply electricity to the villagers who will be deprived of electrical connection. For this reason whatsoever expenses are to be incurred shall be borne by the licensee.

The distribution licensee shall do the above within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order. So far as the removal of the wires is concerned, it shall be done within a period of 72 hours from the date of communication of this order.

On the prayer of the writ petitioner as also the respondent that there may be breach of the distribution license’s attempts to carry out this order of the court. I direct that the Superintendent of Police, North 24-Parganas as also the officer in charge of the concerned police station, the respondent no.7, shall provide adequate armed police and ensure that the order of court is carried out in accordance with law. No costs. Certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the parties.