SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 4199

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K SREENIVASA REDDY, J
S ZAMEER AHMAD – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA – Respondent
Writ Petition No: 36250/2025



Advocates:
For the Petitioners: VARREY VENKATA NAGA VISHNU TEJA
For the Respondents:VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL, D S SIVADARSHAN, AKHIL KRISHNAN NHAI Panel Advocate

No prior notice required for erecting transmission lines under Electricity Act; compensation is the only remedy for property owners.

Headnote:(A) Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 67, 68 and 164 - Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 - Constitutional Article 14, 21, 300-A - Petitioners challenged the erection of transmission towers in their properties without acquisition - The court found no prior notice or hearing required for land appropriation under the Electricity Act, and compensation claims are applicable - Reasoning supports public interest and compliance with statutory authority. (Paras 11-20)

(B) Constitutional Law - Right to property - Petitioners entitled to compensation for any damages resulting from lawful appropriation under public projects - However, no grounds to halt project due to prior notification issues as per statutory provisions were found. (Paras 18-20)

Table of Content
1. the petitioners asserted ownership over land for transmission tower placement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. the respondents defended actions under statutory authority provisions. (Para 4 , 6 , 7)
3. court evaluated lawful authority and the need for prior notice. (Para 8 , 9 , 12)
4. court found no requirement for prior notice; compensation is provided post-action. (Para 10 , 11 , 15)
5. the petitioners can claim compensation, but their blocking actions were dismissed. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)

ORDER:

The Writ Petitioners, claiming to be the owners and possessors of land to an extent of Ac.1.67 cents situated in survey No.149-2D4 and Ac.2.28 cents in survey No.149- 2D3, respectively, both situated in Podaralla village, Bukkarayasamudram mandal, Anantapur district (hereinafter referred to, as „the subject properties‟), filed the present Writ Petition seeking to declare the action of respondents in trying to erect high power transmission tower in the subject properties without acquisition and without following due process of law, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with their possession in respect of the said properties.

2. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition goes to show that mother of the petitioners was the original owner of the subject properties and other properties, and after her death, the petitioners got the respective subject properties in the registered partition effected on 30.01.2025, and have been in possession and enjoyment of their respective properties. 6th respondent, which is a subsidiary of Resonia Limited, was awarded the works for development of Inter-State Transmission Scheme „Transmission System for Integration of Anantapur-II REZ- Phase-I‟ through Tariff Based Competitive Bidding, and the transmission system will be used for evacuation of green power from Anantapur REZ and for supplying reliable green power between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. The petitioners came to know that one such transmission tower is proposed to be laid in the subject properties belonging to the petitioners in survey No.149- 2D3 and 2D4 of Podaralla village.

It is the further case of petitioners that on 1.11.2025, 4th respondent released details for proposed fixation of tower base compensation for erection of transmission towers by Anantapur II REZ Transmission Limited wherein survey No.148 of Podaralla village was mentioned for tower base compensation for erection of transmission tower, whereas the respondents are taking steps to high-handedly erect the tower in the subject properties situated in survey No.149.

3. It is further stated in the writ affidavit that 5th respondent, vide endorsement dated 06.11.2025, gave information under the RtI Act, 2005 to the petitioners that the approved tower schedule with LoC No.AP38 and Tower Code C (15-22)-00 with farmer name Hussain and survey No.149 in Podaralla village. 2nd respondent replied to the application made by petitioners under RtI Act, 2005 that there is no information available in their office regarding the information sought by the petitioners.

It is further stated that foundation of the said high power transmission pole is about 70 x 70 square feet and the overhanging conductor wires which are raised above the said base would be approximately to a width of 240 feet and the pole is to a height of 240 feet; that the adjacent site of petitioners‟ land is a fast developing township and erecting such transmission pole would endanger lives of people around the said area.

It is the grievance of the petitioners that before erecting such a tower in their land, neither any notice was issued to them nor any survey is conducted; that if the said tower is erected, entire remaining land of petitioners becomes useless; that the respondents have no such power to act in such arbitrary manner; that the lands of petitioners are situated adjacent to National Highway, and they had already lost Ac.1.00 c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top