- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 23422 OF 2025 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: SMT KHUSHBOO BANSAL, W/O ANKIT BANSAL, R/A DOOR NO. 3-51-/170, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, FLAT NO.A2101, PLANET SKS, KADRI, KUNTIKANA ROAD, MANGALORE - 575 008 …PETITIONER [BY SRI D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI ANOOP HARANAHALLI, ADVOCATE (PH)] AND: 1. DEPUTY COLLECTOR CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BUNDER, DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALORE, KARNATAKA - 575 001. 2. THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED CORPORATION LIMITED, KAVERI BHAVANA, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ELE), PLANNING AND COORDINATION, THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, 4TH FLOOR, KAVERI BHAVANA, BENGALURU - 560 009. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), MAJOR WORKS DIVISION, KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED KAVOOR, MANGALORE - 575 015. …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. VAHEEDA, AGA FOR R1 (PH); SRI H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4 (PH)] Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29.04.2025 PASSED BY THE R1 IN PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO. MAG (5) C. R. 32/2024/454580/C9 (AT ANNEXURE -A). DIRECT R2 TO 4 TO ALTER THE SITUS OF TOWER NO.11 TO ENSURE LEAST DAMAGE TO THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking for following reliefs: a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari and quash the Order dated 29.04.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 in proceedings bearing no.MAG (5) C.R. 32/2024/454580/C9 (at Annexure-A); b) Direct Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to alter the situs of Tower No.11 to ensure least damage to the Schedule Property; and c) Pass any other order/relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interests of justice and equity. 2. Sri D.R. Ravishankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Anoop Haranahalli, advocate for petitioner submitted that under registered Sale Deed dated 19.08.2022, petitioner purchased 09 Acres 89.50 Cents of land in R.S.nos.317/5, 222/5, 223 and 282/2 of Kadandale village, Moodabidri Taluk, D.K. District. It was submitted, respondents - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 no.2 to 4 were in process of drawing 400 KVA Extra High- Tension Transmission Line over said land, petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.no.25137/2023 for direction to respondents no.2 to 4 herein to consider petitioner's representation at Annexure-B, wherein petitioner had sought for certain deviations as would cause least damage to petitioner's property instead of drawing line in middle of petitioner's property as proposed. Said writ petition was disposed of on 28.11.2023, directing respondent no.3 to consider petitioner's representation as objections under Section 16(1) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, ('Act', for short) and pass orders thereon and pending same, respondents were directed not to take any precipitative action. 3. It was submitted in pursuance of same, respondent no.3 had initiated proceedings under Section 16(4) of Act and petitioner had approached empanelled surveyor of respondent no.2 for Deviation Survey Report. Said surveyor had inspected site and issued Deviation Survey Report as per Annexure-G. In meanwhile, respondents had issued communication at Annexure-H to petitioner about proceeding with installation of transmission lines as per permission obtained from District - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 Magistrate. Thereafter, impugned order at Annexure-A is passed rejecting petitioner’s request. 4. It was submitted, main reason for rejection of petitioner's representation was that at time of consideration of objections under Sections 16(1) and (4) of Act, District Magistrate was not empowered to examine deviation. It was submitted, Section 10(d) of Act, appropriate authority was to ensure as little damage as possible at time of permitting drawing of lines and to direct payment of compensation for same. While Section 17 of Act, provided remedy to land owners even after drawing of lines to seek for deviation. It was submitted, since petitioner had sought for deviation which was opposed by respondents mainly on cost of deviation and not technical feasibility, it was submitted, as specifically provided in proviso to Section 17(1) of Act, petitioner would undertake to forego 50% of compensation received or actual cost incurred for deviation whichever was lower. Under such circumstances, rejection of petitioner's request was contrary to provisions of Section 17 of Act and therefore, sought for allowing writ petition. 5. Sri H.V. Devaraju, learned panel counsel for respondents no.2 to 4 on instructions would submit that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 request of petitioner for deviation would require realignment of Towers no.10, 11 and 12. Whereas installation of Tower no.12 was completed, footing of Tower no.10 was completed, location of Tower no.11 was identified and work was in progress and therefore, petitioner’s request for deviation cannot be considered. It was submitted, as provided under Section 16 of Act, petitioner would be entitled for damages. It was alternatively submitted that deviation proposed by petitioner was likely to invite objections from other affected persons and same would delay completion of installation of transmission lines escalating costs. It was further submitted that purchase of land by petitioner was after publication of scheme for installation of transmission lines and having walked into proposal, petitioner was estopped from questioning same. On said grounds, sought for dismissal of writ petition. 6. Smt.Vaheeda, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent no.1 would support said submission. 7. Heard, learned counsel for parties and perused writ petition record. 8. From above, first contention of respondents that petitioner is estopped from challenging or seeking for deviation on ground of having purchased land after publication of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 proposal, has to be recorded only to be rejected on ground that purchase of land by petitioner would only mean petitioner would assume same rights as land owners/seller under Sections 10, 16 and 17 of Act. Said rights cannot be denied petitioner. 9. Insofar as feasibility of deviation, objections of respondents filed before District Magistrate, copy of which is produced along with memo by learned counsel for petitioner today was not about technical feasibility, but about additional expenditure. Deviation is also opposed on ground that installation of Tower no.12 is completed and footing of Tower no.10 work had proceeded up-to installation, which would indicate circumstances were ripe for invocation of Section 17 of Act. 10. On perusal of Deviation Survey Report submitted by approved surveyor of respondent it would appear that by shifting of point of installation of Tower no.11 towards border of petitioner's land would facilitate reduction of damage to value of petitioner's property. But same would require examination/consideration by District Magistrate under provisions of Section 17 of Act. Such being case, rejection on ground that such stage had not arisen would fall foul of reasonableness. Therefore, feasibility or permissibility of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 deviation would require to be re-examined by appropriate authority as provided under Section 17 of Act i.e. by District Magistrate. 11. Hence, following: ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. Impugned order dated 29.04.2025 passed by respondent No.1 - District Magistrate in proceedings bearing no.MAG (5) C.R. 32/2024/454580/C9, (Annexure-A) is quashed. iii. Since parties are represented, they shall appear before respondent no.1 - District Magistrate without fresh notice on 29.08.2025 at 3.00 p.m. iv. Responder no. 1 - District Magistrate is directed to consider petitioner's request for deviation in light of Deviation Survey Report at Annexure-G and additional material if any produced and thereafter pass appropriate orders thereon. v. It would be open to respondent no.1 - District Magistrate to issue notice to neighboring land owners also to hear same before passing orders. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31773 WP No. 23422 of 2025 vi. Said exercise shall be completed as far as possible within two months. vii. Till then, respondents not proceed with further work insofar as Tower nos.10 and 11 is concerned. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29