The Madras High Court has asked the Coimbatore Collector to explain why it should not impose ₹ 50,000 as cost for passing an order without considering its direction.
Justice T. Raja in his order of November 1, 2019 said that in May 2018 the Court had passed an order directing the Collector to consider within four weeks K.G. Chavady farmer M. Velusamy’s petition. But the Collector had passed an order on Mr.Velusamy’s petition only in October 2019, after a good one-and-half years. And, in passing the order the Collector had failed to refer to its order. Mr. Velusamy had filed a petition in November 2017 objecting to the path chosen by the Tangedco to take overhead electric wires to a substation near Madukkarai. His objection was that the Tangedco had taken a circuitous route to favour a private company and in doing so it had planned to erect electric poles on a few farmers’ lands, including his.
As the Collector did not consider his petition, he approached the court, which directed the petition to be considered within four weeks. As the Collector did not consider it within the stipulated time, did not personally inspect the place but deputed an official and did not refer to the May 2018 order, the Court had asked the Collector why it should not impose the cost.
