Absence of demonstrable evidence of procedural violations by the respondent results in upholding the compliance of legal requirements during the execution of transmission works under relevant statutes.

ORDER:

NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J.

Petitioners assert that they are owners and possessors of agricultural lands in various survey numbers of Kadthal Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, where they have been cultivating crops for more than two decades. They state that their lands contain cattle sheds, pump rooms, workers' rooms, storage rooms for cultivation equipment, iron fencing and paddy farming. They contend that Respondent No.7, without issuing any prior notice, entered their private patta lands, marked the ground with circles and numbers with colour paint and proposed to erect 765 kV transmission towers. They describe this as a highhanded act amounting to trespass and a punishable offence. They claim that when they approached Respondent No.7 and orally objected to the works, the officials refused to acknowledge even a letter issued by the local MLA, dated 08.01.2024, requesting realignment of the transmission line.

1.1. Petitioners contend that Respondent No.7 has been carrying out transmission route approval under Section 164 of the ELECTRICITY ACT , 2003 until 30.01.2025. They rely on e mail dated 28.09.2024 to claim that Respondent No.7 carried out works even before obtaining statutory approval. They further allege that Respondent No.7 is acting contrary to the guidelines and approvals issued by Respondents 1 and 2, including the guidelines issued under No.25-10/27/2023-PG dated 09.06.2023. They state that the Standing Committee Report relating to tower failures from April 2019 to December 2021 demonstrates that non-adherence to guidelines has caused past failures, therefore, Respondent No.7's execution cannot be trusted.

1.2. Petitioners assert that since October 2024, Respondent No.7 has changed the approved route alignment granted under Gazette Notification No. 578 dated 31.01.2025. They specifically allege that Respondent No.7 issued notices to Petitioners 1 to 6 mentioning Angle Points AP-122/0, AP-122A, AP-123, AP-125, AP-126 and AP-130, with tower types DC2+6M, DB1+3, DB2+3M, DC2+0M, DC2+0M, and DD45+6M and specific latitude-longitude coordinates, which, Petitioners claim, are not approved for Kadthal Village under the Gazette Notification. They state that as per the route map obtained under the RTI Act, these Angle Points fall in neighboring villages such as Chintakuntapalle, Keshampet, Chowlapally and Ravichedu, and not in Kadthal Village. They therefore, allege that Respondent No.7 altered the route alignment for its own benefit and is constructing towers at unapproved locations.

1.3. Petitioners further state that while notices were selectively issued only to Petitioners 1 to 6, Respondent No.7 began executing works on the lands of Petitioners 7 to 21 without issuing any notices, without obtaining their consent and in violation of the principles of natural justice. They allege that when they questioned Respondent No.7 about the alignment, they were told that "non-applicant farmers are obstructing the works" and that police forces had been deployed as per permissions granted by Respondent No.4. They assert that this action is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the ELECTRICITY ACT , 2003 and the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006.

1.4. Petitioners further contend that after discovering the markings, they approached Respondents 4, 5, 6 and 7 with written representations dated 02.10.2024, 13.11.2024, 18.10.2024 and 23.10.2024 submitted at the Gram Panchayat as well as respective offices, but no action was taken despite continuous follow-ups. They also rely on an e mail sent by ano