📷 Image: Wikimedia Commons / TrendSPLEND
Local
Rajasthan High Court Seeks Response on Pumping Station Built Under 220 kV Line
✍️ Amar Ujala · Rajasthan
🗓 30 Sep 2026, 12:30 PM
👁 13
A public interest petition filed in Rajasthan High Court alleges that a pumping station was constructed beneath a 220 kV high‑tension line. The court has directed the Rajasthan State TV Network to submit a response within six weeks.
A public interest petition was lodged in the Rajasthan High Court alleging that a pumping station was built directly beneath a 220 kV high‑tension power line in Jaipur. The petitioners argue that the construction violates safety norms and poses a risk to the power infrastructure.
The petition details that the pumping station, which supplies water to the local municipal system, was erected without proper clearance from the power authorities. It claims that the proximity to the high‑tension line could compromise both the structural integrity of the station and the safety of the electrical grid.
In response, the Rajasthan High Court has issued a notice to the Rajasthan State TV Network (RVPNL), the entity responsible for overseeing the project, demanding a written reply within six weeks. The court has also asked for documentation on permits, safety assessments, and any coordination with the power utilities.
The ruling underscores the court’s willingness to scrutinize infrastructure projects that may affect public safety. If the petition’s claims are proven, the state may need to undertake remedial measures or re‑evaluate the site’s suitability for such installations.
The petition details that the pumping station, which supplies water to the local municipal system, was erected without proper clearance from the power authorities. It claims that the proximity to the high‑tension line could compromise both the structural integrity of the station and the safety of the electrical grid.
In response, the Rajasthan High Court has issued a notice to the Rajasthan State TV Network (RVPNL), the entity responsible for overseeing the project, demanding a written reply within six weeks. The court has also asked for documentation on permits, safety assessments, and any coordination with the power utilities.
The ruling underscores the court’s willingness to scrutinize infrastructure projects that may affect public safety. If the petition’s claims are proven, the state may need to undertake remedial measures or re‑evaluate the site’s suitability for such installations.