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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 7165

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI
M.V.Ramamoorthy – Appellant
Versus
The Government of India – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI

and

W.M.P. No.34674 of 2022

M.V.Ramamoorthy Petitioner

Vs

1. The Government of India,

Rep. by its Secretary,

Ministry of Power,

Shram Shakti Bhawan,

Rafi Marg, New Delhi 110 001.

2.The Government of Tamil Nadu,

Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

Energy (A1) Department,

Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

3.Tamil Nadu Transmission

Corporation Ltd.,

(TAN TRANSCO),

Rep. by its Chairman,

10th Floor, NPKRP Maligai,

No.144, Anna Salai,

Chennai 600 002.

4.The Executive Engineer,

Transmission Line Construction,

Dharmapuri - 636 705.

5.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

6.The District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, Vellore. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records and quash the proceedings of the 5th respondent in M.M.D1/6229 /2021 dated 01.12.2021 and consequently directing the 5th respondent to determine the compensation payable to the petitioner for the damage caused on account of erection of High Power Electric Tower and Lines in his agricultural land bearing S.No.925 situate at Pasumathur village, Gudiyatham Taluk, Vellore District as per the Guidelines dated 15.10.2015 of the 1st respondent.

For petitioner : Mr.R. Dhanasekar For respondents : Mr.ARL. Sundaresan Addl. Solicitor General Assisted by Dr. D. Simon, CGSC for R1 Mr.P. Ganesan Addl. Govt. Pleader for RR2, 5 and 6 Mr.D.R. Arunkumar for R3 and R4

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to call for records and quash the proceedings of the 5th respondent in M.M.D1/6229 /2021 dated 01.12.2021 and consequently directing the 5th respondent to determine the compensation payable to the petitioner for the damage caused on account of erection of High Power Electric Tower and Lines in his agricultural land bearing S.No.925 situate at Pasumathur village, Gudiyatham Taluk, Vellore District as per the Guidelines dated 15.10.2015 of the 1st respondent.

2. The petitioner is the owner of agricultural punja lands measuring a total extent of Ac.3.84 comprised in S.No.909/3A and S.No.925, situated at Pasumathur Village, Gudiyatham Taluk, Vellore District. In the year 2014, the 3rd respondent, laid a high-power electric transmission line through the petitioner’s lands. Aggrieved thereby, initially, the petitioner approached this Court in W.P. No.9674 of 2014, which came to be disposed of by order dated 23.06.2014, directing consideration of the petitioner’s representation and subsequently several litigations arose. Later due to non-consideration, he further submitted a representation dated 08.09.2015 seeking compensation. While so, the 4th respondent, by order dated 26.09.2015, rejected the petitioner’s claim for compensation, holding that the provisions of Act 30 of 2013 were not applicable and that under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the petitioner was not entitled to compensation for utilisation of land. Subsequently, the said rejection was put to challenge by filing another writ petition viz., W.P. No.20757 of 2017, which was disposed of by this Court on 26.03.2021, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation dated 14.08.2021 to the 5th respondent. However, the 5th respondent, by the impugned order dated 01.12.2021, once again rejected the claim for compensation on the ground that the project was implemented prior to the issuance of the guidelines dated 15.10.2015.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 3rd respondent, without following the procedure contemplated under law, laid a high-power electric transmission line through the petitioner’s lands, thereby caused severe hindrance and it affected the petitioner’s right to enjoy and cultivate the property. Pursuant to directions issued by this Court, earlier, the 4th respondent considered the representation, however, the grievances of the petitioner

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