1/9 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 05th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WRIT PETITION Nos.164-175/2018 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. D.M. HALAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS MATTI VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 2. ALI SAAB S/O HUSSAIN SAAB AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 3. H. HANUMANATHAPPA S/O HALAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 4. G.S. SHEKARAPPA S/O NAGAPPA SANNAHUDUGAPLARA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGNERE TALUK, DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 2/9 5. MAHABOOB SUBHANI S/O HUSSAIN SAAB AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 6. CHANNAMMA W/O M. NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 7. H.V. THIPPESWAMY S/O VIRUPAKSHAYAA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 8. NARAPPA S/O MURIGEPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 9. K.C. PALAKSHAPPA S/O K.C. MALAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 10. BHEEMAPPA S/O A.K. BHEEMAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 3/9 MATTI VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 11. THIMMANNA @ THIPPANNA S/O SIDAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS MATTI VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 12. RAMESH S.H. S/O HALAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. …PETITIONERS (BY Mr. M.V. VEDAMURTHY, ADV.) AND: 1. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR KAVERI BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560009. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577001. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) K.P.T.C.L. MAJOR WORKS DIVISION HADADI ROAD DAVANGERE-577002. 4. GOWDARA MAHADEVAPPA S/O SHIVAPPA HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 5. KAREHANUMANTHAPPA S/O ANJINAPPA Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 4/9 SHYAGALE VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 6. KENCHAMMA W/O LATE CHANDRAPPA MATTI VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 7. MURIGAYYA S/O MAHADEVAYYA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS HOOVINAMADU VILLAGE MAYAKONDA HOBLI DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577534. 8. THEERATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O BASAPPA SHYAGALE VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT.577534. …RESPONDENTS (BY Ms. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA FOR R2) THESE W.Ps. ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DTD:13-12-2013 PUBLISHED VIJAYAVANI KANNADA DAILY NEWSPAPER VIDE ANNEXURE-B BY THE R-1 AND 3 BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN SO FAR AS THE PROJECT OF CONSTRUCTION OF 66 KV LILO LINE FOR ROUTE LENGTH OF 6.04 KMS FROM THE 66 KV DAVANAGERE- LINGADAHALLI LINE IN THE PROPOSED 66/11 KV SHAYAGALE (LOKIKERE) SUB-STATION IN DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DAVANAGERE DISTRICT SL.No.3 OVER PETITIONERS PROPERTIES IS CONCERNED. THESE W.Ps. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 5/9 ORDER Mr. M.V. Vedamurthy, Adv. for Petitioners Ms. Niloufer Akbar, AGA for R2 1. The petitioners 12 in number, led by Mr. D.M.Halappa and 11 others, have filed these writ petitions in this Court on 02.01.2018 against the Respondents-KPTCL and private Respondents 4 to 8 namely, Mr.Gowdara Mahadevappa, Mr.Karehanumanthappa, Ms. KenChamma, Mr. Murigayya and Mr.Theerathappa, with the following prayers:- “ (i) Quash the notification dated 13-12- 2013 bearing No. KaEn (Vi) BruKaVi/ SaKaE (Vi)/ KiEn (Vi)/ Da/13-14/3067-69 published Vijayavani Kannada daily newspaper vide Annexure-B by the respondent Nos.1 and 3 by issuing a Writ of Certiorari in so far as the project of construction of 66 KV LILO line for a route length of 6.04 kms from the 66 KV Davangere-Lingadahalli line in the proposed 66/11 KV Shaygale (Lokikere) Sub-Station in Davangere Taluk and Davangere District at sl.no.3 over ‘petitioners’ properties’ is concerned. Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 6/9 (ii) Quash the notification dated 13-12- 2013 bearing No. EEE/AEE(O)/JE(E)/ MWD/ DVG/13-14/ Notification /3067-69 published in Deccan Herald daily English newspaper vide Annexure-C by the respondent nos.1 and 3 by issuing a Writ of Certiorari so far as the project of construction of 66 KV LILO line for a route length of 6.04 kms from the 66 KV Davangere- Lingadahalli line in the proposed 66/11 KV Shaygale (Lokikere) Sub-Station in Davangere Taluk and Davangere District at sl.no.3 over ‘petitioners’ properties’ is concerned. (iii) Quash the Notification dated 13/11/2013 published in Gazette Notification on 6-2-2014 vide Annexure-D issued by the respondent No.3 by issuing a Writ of Certiorari in so far as the project of construction of 66 KV LILO line for a route length of 6.04 kms from the 66 KV Davangere-Lingadahalli line in the proposed 66/11 KV Shaygale (Lokikere) Sub-Station in Davangere Taluk and Davangere District at sl.no.3 over ‘petitioners properties’ is concerned. (iv) Quash the order dated 27-11-2017 bearing no.M.A.Ji.(3) CR:28/2016-17 passed by respondent no.2 vide Annexure-Q by issuing a Writ of Certiorari. Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 7/9 (v) Issue a writ of mandamus or any writ, order or direction directing the respondent not to draw HT (High Tension) lines over ‘petitioners’ properties’ is concerned. (vi) Direct the respondent to pay the costs of this petition and grant such other and further reliefs as are just”. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr.M.V.Vedamurthy has urged before the Court that the Respondent-KPTCL in the NotifiCation for laying down the 66/11 KV EleCtriC Power Transmission Line in the NotiCe published on 13.11.2013 did not speCify the exaCt lands through whiCh the said Transmission lines were to pass and therefore, the petitioners were deprived of their opportunity to file their objeCtions against the said Power Transmission Lines whiCh is now sought to be ConstruCted and drawn through their agriCultural lands and the petitioners have also not been paid any Compensation so far in this regard. Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 8/9 3. After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioners, this Court is satisfied that the writ petitions are misConCeived and are liable to be dismissed. 4. A bare perusal of the NotiCe published on 13.11.2013 Annexure-D itself Clearly shows that in different parts of the said NotiCe, the names of the villages have been given by the Respondents-KPTCL through whiCh the said 66/11 KV Transmission line was to pass. The villages like Kuppadahalli, Hulikunte, BiliChodu, KerebilaChi, Channagiri etC., are duly mentioned in the said NotiCe. Therefore, the NotiCe published by the Respondent-KPTCL Cannot be said to be non speCifiC or vague. 5. The publiC projeCts of drawing of Transmission lines Cannot be interfered with by the Courts on suCh vague averments at suCh belated stages. If the petitioners lands are being used for suCh Power Transmission lines, the petitioners, of Course, have a Date of Order 05-02-2018 W.P.Nos.164-175/2018 D.M. Halappa & Ors. Vs. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Ors. 9/9 right to Claim Compensation for the loss Caused to them for the part of land of whiCh they are deprived in the Course of setting up of the Power Transmission lines, but the remedy for the petitioners in suCh CirCumstanCes lies either to raise their objeCtions and Claim of Compensation before the ConCerned Land ACquisition OffiCer or the ConCerned authorities of KPTCL and in Case, they are not satisfied, then they may approaCh the Civil Court for establishing their respeCtive Claims for suCh Compensation. The said exerCise Cannot be undertaken in the extraordinary jurisdiCtion of this Court under ArtiCle 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. The writ petitions are therefore misConCeived and the same are liable to be dismissed and aCCordingly, they are dismissed. No Costs. Sd/- JUDGE Srl. .