Order on Board

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-

“10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire record relating to the case of the petitioner.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to declare the notification dtd 29.11.2016 is against the article 14 and 31A of constitution of India.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of certitori and quash the Notification dtd 29.11.2016 and order dtd 18.09.2019 directing to Respondent authority to recalculate the compensation use the 85% of Market value ratio.

10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing to Respondent authority to recalculate the compensation use the 85% of Market value ratio and full term of damages as per section 10 and 16 of Telegraph act 1885.

10.5 Any other relief deems fit just and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.

10.6 Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioners.”

2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is the owner of land bearing Khasra No. 830/04, admeasuring approximately 0.186 hectares, situated at Village Pussore, District Raigarh, upon which Respondent No. 3 has erected a 400 kV transmission line passing through the middle of the said land; and that, in terms of Sections 67 and 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Sections 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the authorities have assessed compensation for damage to the land, including diminution in its value and restrictions on its use, and have awarded an amount of Rs. 30,72,300/- in accordance with the Government notification prescribing compensation for right of way at 15% of the market value of the land, whereas in cases involving erection of towers on land, compensation is assessed at 85% of the market value. It is submitted that such differential treatment is arbitrary and amounts to artificial discrimination, contrary to the provisions of the Telegraph Act, which mandate payment of compensation commensurate with the actual damage suffered by the landowner, particularly in a case like the present one where substantial restrictions on the use of the entire land effectively diminish its value and utility. It is further submitted that while land falling under the transmission corridor may remain partially usable, it nonetheless suffers significant loss in value due to restrictions on usage and limitations on future development prospects beyond agricultural purposes, which ought to be duly considered while determining compensation based on the nature and location of the land. The petitioner contends that similarly situated persons have been awarded compensation at vastly differing rates—85% in some cases and only 15% in others— thereby violating the principles of equality enshrined under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, as well as the second proviso to Article 31-A, and hence, being aggrieved by such arbitrary and discriminatory treatment, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondent authorities is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case and violative of the settled principles of law, it is submitted that, in terms of Sections 67 and 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Sections 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the authorities have assessed compensation for diminution in the value of land caused by the laying of transmission lines and restrictions on land use, and have awarded a sum of Rs. 30,72,300/- by applying the Government notification which prescribes compensation at 15% of the market value for right of way, whereas in cases involving erection of transmission towers, compensation is fixed at 85% of the market value; such differential treatment amounts to artificial and unreasonable discrimination and is contrary to the statutory mandat