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 :â€

“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.â€​

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:â€

“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.â€​

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.