K.R. Mohapatra, J. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. I.A. No. 2493 of 2024 has been filed by the Opposite Party Nos.1 & 2-Odisha Power Transmission Corporation Limited (for brevity ‘OPTCL’) with a prayer to vacate the interim order dated 13th June, 2023 passed by this Court in I.A. No.8753 of 2023, wherein it is directed that status quo // 2 // I.A. No.2493 OF 2024 Page 2 of 8 over the case land shall be maintained till the next date. The interim order is continuing till date.

3. While taking up the I.A. for vacation of stay it is felt that the merit of the writ petition has to be gone into. Hence, on consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

4. This writ application has been filed with a prayer to restrain the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2 from installing High Tension (HT) Tower for drawl of 220 KV D/C line Pandiabil-Samagara over the land of the Petitioner, i.e., Plot No. 1354 under Khata No. 410 to an extent of Ac.0.060 decimal situated in Mouza- Balukhanda under Puri tahasil in the district of Puri (for brevity ‘the case land’).

5. Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel submits that the Petitioner and his brother, namely, Sri Prasanta Nayak got the case land in a family partition by virtue of a registered partition deed dated 16th March, 2022 (Annexure-2) and continued to possess the it jointly with his brother. Although the case land is recorded as Sarada-II (agricultural land), but it is befitting for homestead purpose and the Petitioner was intending to construct his residential house thereon. Initially an advertisement for drawl of HT line was made on 30th September, 2013 (Annexure-C/1). Although the Mouza Balukhanda is reflected in the notification, but no particulars of the land over which the HT line was proposed to be drawn, including the case land, was specifically stated therein. No communication whatsoever for construction of tower or // 3 // I.A. No.2493 OF 2024 Page 3 of 8 drawl of HT line was ever made to the Petitioner at any time. As such, the Petitioner was kept in dark about the construction of the tower and drawl of HT line over his land. Although a portion of the land is proposed to be used for construction of tower, but the entire case land will render useless for being used either for agricultural purpose or for any other purpose including construction of any residential house thereon. Thus, the Petitioner will be seriously prejudiced, if the tower is constructed over the case land. As yet no construction has been made on the case land. As such, the Petitioner is entitled to the relief claimed in the writ petition. Thus, this Court finding a prima facie case in favour of the Petitioner as an interim measure directed the parties to maintain status quo over the case land.

6. Mr. Parija, learned Advocate General appearing for the OPTCL submits that during cyclone ‘Fani’ in 2019, 220 KV Pandiabil-Samangara D/C line was severely damaged. Thus, the OPTCL undertook restoration of the aforesaid HT transmission line by reconstructing towers and drawing the conductor. Out of 92 towers, 91 towers have already been constructed by the time the interim order was passed by this Court. So far as the tower over the case land, i.e., the land of the Petitioner is concerned, pile capping has already been done. But, no further construction could be made. It is his submission that the Petitioner has a remedy to claim for compensation for construction of tower and drawl of HT line over the case land. Thus, the interim order should be vacated // 4 // I.A. No.2493 OF 2024 Page 4 of 8 as it creates serious prejudice to the public at large. He also relied upon the case of Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. –v- Century Textiles and Industries Ltd. and others , reported in (2017) 5 SCC 143, wherein at Paragraph-26, Hon’bl