( 1 ) THE petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the companies Act. The petitioner-Company owns landed property in Sy. Nos. 362, 363, 365/1 situated at Gudur village, Bibinagar Mandal, Nalgonda district to an extent of Ac. 33-00 having purchased the same by the registered sale deed Nos. 4591/94, 4592/1/94 and 4593/1/94 dated 7-9-1994. The petitioner claims that those lands were converted as house sites/plots after obtaining layout permission from the Gudur Gram Panchayat, dated 21-8-1996. The petitioner complaining that the respondent authorities of the a. P. S. E. B. without any notice to the petitioner proposed to lay the overhead lines above the land of the petitioner filed the writ petition praying for declaration that the action of the respondents in encroaching upon the property of the petitioner and laying overhead lines for transmission of electrical energy and putting up towers for support of the lines as arbitrary and without authority of law and for a consequential direction to the respondents to consider for re-alignment of electrical supply lines.

( 2 ) IN response to Rule Nisi, the second respondent has filed counter- affidavit resisting the claim of the petitioner. In the counter-affidavit, it is stated that sanctioned scheme was published in the A. P. Gazette dated 24-8-1995 to supply electric power for the public purpose and two months time was given in the Gazette notification for submitting any representation or objection from the interested persons; the lands in question are agricultural lands and no houses are constructed till 2-10-1998; the sanctioned scheme was published in the Gazette even before the Gram Panchayat approved the house layout on 24-8-1995; Power Grid Corporation of India has laid 400 K. V. line in the land; the A. P. S. E. B. has power under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 to lay transmission lines for supply and distribution of electrical power for agriculture, domestic and industrial loads in any private land without giving any individual notice; there was no objection from the petitioner at the time of laying of the foundation for the tower at location-87 in the land of the petitioner; the construction of the single tower foundation in the land of the petitioner is already completed; there is no other alternative to lay the transmission line except in the present alignment due to various physical, topographical conditions at site such as electrified railway track, a big irrigation tank, 400 K. V. Line, Bibinagar village. However, in the counter, it is stated that if any damage is caused to the standing crops or fruit bearing trees while laying the transmission lines, compensation be claimed by the petitioner from the Board as determined by the competent revenue officials.

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on Section 42 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, contended that the respondents are not entitled to invoke Part-Ill of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 unless the sanctioned scheme provides for invocation of the powers envisaged under part-Ill of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. Secondly, the learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that since the petitioner has objected to laying of the lines over its lands, the Board is obligated to approach the District magistrate for an order, and unless the District Magistrate grants an order to lay the line, the Board cannot lay the line over the lands of the petitioner nor can it construct the towers, as mandated under the provisions of subsection (1) of Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. In support of the contention, the learned Counsel for the petitioner would place reliance on the judgment of the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in Bharat Plywood and timber Products Private Limited vs. Kerala State Electricity Board. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for A. P. S. E. B. submitted that the sanctioned scheme in question provides for laying of electric