AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
The present petition has been filed under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Indian Constitution complaining deliberate or willful non-compliance of the orders of this court on the part of the respondents in following the directions of this court dated 15/7/13 in W.P. No. 2251/13 and subsequently in Contempt Case No. 348/13, vide order dated 12/8/13.
We are taking up the first order for consideration which was issued in Writ Petition No. 2251/13. It reads as under:-
After hearing the parties at length and keeping in view the provisions of law, it is directed that the competent authority shall shift the electricity line strictly in accordance with Section 53 of the Electricity Act, 2003 which deals with the provisions relating to safety and electricity supply and Section 68 thereof which deals with Overhead lines. The paramount is to avoid the accidents in the area.
With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that before passing the said order, since the petitioners were apprehending that the respondents may go against their sanctioned plan in order to change place of shifting of HT Lines to some other place to lane No. 2 of Krishna Colony, Vidisha, without obtaining approval from the competent authority, this court after hearing the counsel for the parties in the said petition passed an interim order on 12/8/13 which reads as under:-
Shri S.B. Mishra, Sr. Advocate with Shri Rishikesh Bohre, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vivek Jain, Advocate for respondents No. 3 and 4.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 3 and 4 undertakes to file reply on the next date of hearing.
List the case on 10th April, 2013.
Up to the next date of hearing, status quo shall be maintained.
Since both the orders were not complied with and the respondents even after passing the orders erected the pole for laying said HT line to the place of their choice, Contempt Petition No. 348/13 was filed by the petitioners, which was decided finally by this court on 12/8/13 in the following manner:-
Counsel for the petitioners made a short prayer in deciding this contempt petition that the pole which has been erected by the respondents after passing of the order by this court, that may be removed.
In our opinion, the respondents shall consider the fact that whether the pole was erected after passing of the order and if it is found true then the same be removed accordingly.
With the aforesaid observation, the contempt petition is disposed of.
No order as to costs.
It is submitted by the petitioners that despite issuing orders by this court from time to time, the respondents without caring to the provisions of Section 53 and 68 of the Electricity Act, again started work of erecting 33 KV HT line from line No. 2, hence, the present petition has been filed for taking appropriate action against the respondents.
Countering the aforesaid, compliance report has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3. It is denied that the work has been carried out without granting sanction from the competent authority. The documents in support of the said submissions have been filed alongwith the report as per Annexure-C/1 and C/2. Hence, it is prayed that this petition be dismissed.
On perusal of the compliance report filed on behalf of the respondents No. 1 to 3, it seems that the work is being done in the light of the permission received from the competent authorities by the respondents and also as per the directions issued by this Court. The petitioners therefore have failed to bring out a case against the respondents to show that without following provisions envisaged in sections 53 and 68 of the Electricity Act and against the directions of this court, the respondents/contemners have performed the work. Hence, after considering the averments made in the petition and on perusal of the reply so filed by the respondents coupled with the documents marked as Annexure-C/1 and C/2, we are of the view that no case for contempt alleging deliberate or willful non-compliance of the orders of this court against the respondents is made out.
Accordingly, we do not find any substance in this contempt petition. It is accordingly dismissed.