JUDGMENT : 

Regard being had to the homogeneous character of the controversy involved in the present cases, writ petitions were analogously heard and by a common order, they are being decided by this Court. Facts of Writ Petition No. 6412/2010 are narrated hereunder.

2. The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition being aggrieved by the action of respondent No. 1 in construction of a tower for transmission of electrical energy through 400 KV High Tension Transmission Lines. The petitioner has stated before this Court that he is the owner of agricultural land bearing Survey No. 434/1, 434/2 and 434/3 ad-measuring area 3.84 acres situated in Village Panod Tehsil Indore. The petitioner has further stated that the land in question was purchased by the petitioner on 16-5-2008 through a registered sale-deed and he is the Bhumi-Swami of the land in question. The petitioner has further stated that he was informed by one of his associate companies namely Kalyan India Infrastructures Private Limited that the Power Grid Corporation of India is proposing to erect a tower for putting up a High Tension Lines of 400 KV over the land belonging to the petitioner. The petitioner's further grievance is that in case, respondent No. 1 is permitted to erect a tower and to carry on the construction of laying High Tension Lines over the land of the petitioner, a large number of area of the land belonging to the petitioner would become unusable, as the petitioner under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Bhumi Vikas Rules, 1984, would be required to leave unused area as an open space, to a stretch of 15 meters on the either side from the centre line of the proposed overhead transmission lines. The petitioner has also stated before this Court that an alternative land is available, which is Government land and the same can be used for construction of transmission tower and for laying transmission lines. The petitioner has further stated that an objection was raised on 29-1-2010. However, instead of granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, a notice was issued on 15-3-2010 under the provisions of sections 68 and 164 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 read with provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, informing the petitioner that transmission line is being laid over the land reflected in the notice and in case, he is aggrieved, he is free to stake his claim for grant of compensation. The petitioner has further stated that a notice was received by the petitioner served by respondent No. 1 through its counsel, informing the petitioner that a caveat is being filed in the matter. The petitioner's grievance is that without obtaining his consent, a transmission tower is being constructed by the Power Grid Corporation of India over the land belonging to the petitioner.

3. The petitioner has raised various grounds before this Court and it has been stated that notice dated 15-3-2010 issued under sections 68 and 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is totally without jurisdiction and there is a distinction between the electrical lines and the transmission lines. It has been vehemently argued by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that section 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 is not applicable in the present case, as the aforesaid section deals with installation of overhead lines (electric lines) while transmission lines are defined under section 2 (72) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the same excludes electric lines since they are high pressure cables for transmission very high electricity from one generation station to another generation station or to a Sub Station.

4. The petitioner has also raised another ground before this Court and the contention of the learned senior counsel is that keeping in view the provisions of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, consent of the petitioner is required and without acquiring the land and without obtaining consent from the petitioner, no such construction can take place, especially keeping in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document