Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 3355 (MAD)

M. Karthik v. Superintending Engineer (South), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai

2012-07-30

R.SUDHAKAR

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Heard Mr.A.E.Kalaiselvan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P. Gunaraj, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. The prayer in the writ petition is to forbear the Respondents on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 14.05.2012, from erecting, installing 11 K.V. Transformer Structure near the petitioner kitchen wall at A1 F1 Vels Mayuri Flats, Gokul Nagar Main Road, Katta Bomman Nagar, Old Pallavaram Chennai. 3. The petitioner has purchased the flat comprising 1000 sq.ft. in the first floor, in the A1F1, Vels Mayura Flats, at Gokul Nagar Main Road, Katta Bomman Nagar, Old Pallavaram, Chennai. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are preparing to instal the Electricity Transformer Structure very near to the kitchen window leaving one and half feet clearance between his kitchen window and the Electricity Transformer Structure. The petitioner has made his objection to the respondents 1 and 3 on 9.5.2012 and 14.5.2012 stating that installation of Electricity Transformer Structure very near to the kitchen window is not in accordance with the relevant Rules and thereby, it may cause great danger to the life of the petitioner and his family members. 4. On notice Mr.P.Gunaraj, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents sought instructions from the Respondents 2 and 3, stated that the objection of the petitioner will be considered and the claim for shifting of the Electricity Transformer Structure will be taken up on the basis of the Code of Technical Instructions for Transmission and Distribution of Electricity, 1990, wherein para 13.03.02 provides Clearance of Low Voltage Lines and Service Lines in relation to the building, which runs as hereunder:- "13.03.02: Clearance to Buildings: A. Medium and low voltage lines and service lines: Power lines should not be taken over buildings as far as possible and every effort should be made to divert the line away for all buildings. Where, however, buildings cannot be avoided, the minimum clearances specified in Rule 79 of I.E.Rules 1956 extracted beow shall be maintained. "1. For any flat roof, open balcony, verandah, roof and lean to roof. i) When the line passes above the building a vertical clearance of 8 feet (2.5 m) for the nearest point. ii) When the line passes adjacent to the building a horizontal clearance of 4 feet (1.25m)." "2. "1. For any flat roof, open balcony, verandah, roof and lean to roof. i) When the line passes above the building a vertical clearance of 8 feet (2.5 m) for the nearest point. ii) When the line passes adjacent to the building a horizontal clearance of 4 feet (1.25m)." "2. Any conductor so situated as to have a clearance less than that specified above, shall be adequately insulated and shall be attached by means of metal clips at suitable intervals to have earthed bearer wire having a breaking strength of not less than 317.5 Kg (1700 lbs). "3. The horizontal clearance shall be measured when the line is at a maximum deflection for the vertical due to wind pressure." 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that when the line passes adjacent to the building a horizontal clearance of 4 feet (1.2 meters) is required. The provision also provides for appropriate safeguards. 6. In the light of the above, the Respondents 2 and 3 are directed to take appropriate steps to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 9.5.2012 and 14.5.2012 so as to avoid untoward incident due to close proximity in installing low voltage electric line. The authority will proceed further in accordance with the rules and regulations and instructions as may be applicable. 7. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2012 is closed.