1. By consent of the learned counsel on either side, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2. Heard Mr.S.Meenakshi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.P.Gunaraj, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3, Mr.R.Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 4th respondent and Mr.Jayesh B. Dolia, learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent.

3. This Writ Petition is filed praying to forbear the respondents from erecting high power grid line Tower in the land of the petitioner measuring an extent of one acre and 70 cents, comprising at Survey No.216/6A situated at Tiruvalangadu Village, Tirutani Taluk, Thiruvallur District, inclusive of further construction and completion of Grid.

4. According to the petitioner, he purchased the land bearing Survey No.216/2A measuring an extent of 1 acre and 70 cents situated at Tiruvalangadu Village, Tirutani Taluk, Thiruvallur District, from the legal heirs of one Mr.Balaraman (Late) through the Sale Deed dated 12.05.2008, which was registered at the Thiruvalangadu Sub-Registrar Office. Patta bearing No.1490 was issued in the petitioner's name by the Revenue Department of Thiruvallur District on 04.08.2009 to the said property. Thereafter, the land was in his continuous possession and he intended to promote the aforesaid land for the purpose of residential plots.

4a. The petitioner was shocked to hear when a few persons were digging the aforesaid land at some marked places and on 04.01.2013, he went there and enquired the persons, who were working on his land. He was told that they are doing digging work in order to erect Electrical Towers in his land as per the instructions of the 2nd respondent. Immediately, he asked them to stop the work by approaching the Police Station. However, the work proceeded. On 04.01.2013, the petitioner sent representations to the respondents and sought their intervention in the matter and to take action to stop the unauthorized work being carried out in his private patta land, without giving any notice to him.

4b. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the respondents did not give him any notice or provide him with compensation. The petitioner has kept that land for residential plots and has prepared layout sketch for dividing residential plots in that land. Further, the erection of such transmission tower will pose danger to his land and it will affect the purpose for which it has been kept.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 5th respondent is making an attempt to erect the tower without hearing the petitioner's objections. He would contend that when the authorities are bound to consider the objection statutorily, the action of the authorities in not even hearing the objections of the petitioner is unsustainable in law.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the 5th respondent/Power Grid Corporation would contend that 90% of the construction work of the tower is completed and therefore, there cannot be any interim injunction to restrain the respondents from proceeding further, as the Power Grid line is on national interest and it has to be erected without any delay.

7. After elaborate arguments and discussion, learned counsel for the petitioner at the end of his arguments made a plea that as per the provisions under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, it is the obligation on the part of the 2nd respondent to refer the objections to the District Magistrate and thereafter the petitioner's objections shall be considered by the District Magistrate concerned and the District Magistrate will decide the same in accordance with the provisions.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and given thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by them.

9. When a similar issue was raised before this Court in W.P.No.25793 of 2011 (Les Ateliers De Pondicherry Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pondicherry Electricity Department (2011 (6) CTC 465), this C