IMPORTANT POINT
The court upheld the authority of the licensee to lay transmission lines under public interest, dismissing the petitioner's objections as untimely and unfounded.

ORDER :

Nupur Bhati, J.

1. Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 and 3 sought time to file reply, however, learned counsel for the petitioner showed urgency in the matter after which learned senior counsel submitted that he is ready to argue the matter withoutfiling the reply. Thus, though the matter was listed in the ‘Fresh’ category, upon the joint request of both the counsel, the matter was heard finally on 25.11.2024 and the order was reserved.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, challenging the notice dated 04.09.2024 (Annex.2) (‘the impugned notice’) issued by the M/s Beawar Transmission Limited (‘BTL’), whereby the respondent No.2-BTL has requested the petitioner to provide her consent for the construction of Tower for 765 K.V. D/C Beawar Transmission Line, which is to pass through the land of the petitioner, and also to inform that compensation for the use of the land will be provided in accordance with the provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 2003 and Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

3. The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:

“It is, therefore, with all humility at command, humbly prayed that;

1. This Hon'ble Court may kindly allow the present writ petition;

2. Call for the record;

3. Quash and set aside the impugned communication/ order dated 04.09.2024 (???EXURE - 2);

4. The respondent Beawar Transmission Limited may kindly be directed to not erect/ install tower in the subject land of the petitioner against the provisions of the law;

5. Any other orders, directions may kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner”

4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner is the Khatedar of the agriculture land comprising of Khasra No.355/171 of village Lunawas Charanan, Jhawar, Jodhpur (hereinafter as ‘the subject land’) and is in possession of the subject land. It is the case of the petitioner that on 06.09.2024 the petitioner received the impugned notice (Annex.2) issued by the respondent No.2-BTL, whereby the petitioner has been asked to provide her consent for construction of Beawar Transmission line, which is to pass through the subject land, and for such use, the compensation will be provided to the petitioner for the possible damage to the crops/agriculture/trees at the subject land. Thereafter, the petitioner vide legal notice dated 13.09.2024 (Annex.3) raised objection and resistance to the impugned notice (Annex.2). Meanwhile, the petitioner also addressed a legal notice cum representation dated 13.09.2024 (Annex.4) to the District Magistrate, Jodhpur. Subsequently, the reply dated 26.09.2024 (Annex.5) was sent by the respondent No.2-BTL in response to the legal notice (Annex.3), however, even after the objection and resistance by the petitioner to the impugned notice (Annex.2), the matter was not put up before the District Magistrate. The petitioner thereafter, vide communication dated 04.10.2024 (Annex.6) requested the District Magistrate, Jodhpur to adjudicate the matter and restrain the respondent No.2-BTL from laying down the Transmission line through the subject land until the matter is decided. However, no hearing has been conducted by the District Magistrate in terms of Section 16 of the Telegraph Act, 1885 and the respondent No.2-BTL is constantly proceeding with the work of laying transmission line through the subject land. Thus, being aggrieved of the same, the petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned notice (Annex.2) issued by the respondent No.2-BTL lays unilateral terms and conditions for entering into contract with the petitioner and arbitrarily seeks the consent of the petitioner for installation of tower in the subject land, which will support overhead high voltage transmission line (765 KV Beawar Transmission Line) whereas the impugned notice (Annex.2) has only been issued for laying overhead lines across t