[2026:RJ-JD:8715-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 208/2026 Manju Sharma W/o Jagdish Sharma, Aged About 55 Years, R/o

6A 12 Rc Vyas Colony Bhilwara Rajasthan.

----Appellant Versus

1. Union Of India, Through Joint Secretary Transmission Ministry Of Power New Delhi.

2. Central Electricity Authority Of India, Having Its Office At Sewa Bhawan Rama Krishna Puram Sector 1 New Delhi

110066.

3. District Magistrate, Bhilwara.

4. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bhilwara.

5. Power Grid Corporation Of India Limited, Power Grid Having Its Registered Office At B 9 Qutab Instutional Area Katwaria Sarai New Delhi 110016.

6. Power Grid Beawar Mandsaur Transmissional Limited, Having Its Registered Office At B 9 Qutab Instutional Area Katwaria Sarai New Delhi 110016.

----Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Pankaj Sharma Mr. Karan Parihar Mr. Harsh Bishnoi Ms. Reema Gupta Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit For Respondents : Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mohan Lal Mr. Vineet R. Dave Mr. Mahipal Bajiya HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

17/02/2026

1. The challenge is to the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby, the writ petition of the appellant-writ petitioner seeking deviation in the installation of high-tension line was not accepted by the Court and it was held that the only remedy available with the petitioner was to claim compensation.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that originally the plan for installation of the transmission line was not on the land of the petitioner but on account of the construction of the highway, the deviation has been done. He further submits that the same could not be a ground for deviation as the highway was already existing at the time when the original plan was made for installation of the line.

3. We notice that the learned Single Judge was satisfied with the reasons given for deviation of the transmission line by the Corporation and having accepted the same, the learned Single Judge proceeded to hold that petitioner would be appropriately compensated. The law with regard to installation of the high tension line is now settled. The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (for short ‘the Act of 1885’) and the necessary amendments made from time to time have been examined by the Apex Court in Power Grid Corporation of India Limited vs. Century Textiles and Industries Limited and Ors., (2017) 5 SCC 143 wherein it has been held that the installation right is available with the Corporation to decide the manner and method in which the transmission line is to be laid down. The only remedy available to a person whose land is affected is to receive compensation.

4. While we notice that Section 10(d) of the Act of 1885 also empowers the Corporation to lay down the transmission line to cause minimum damage but once it has already approved a particular plan for installation of the high transmission line, there is no occasion for this Court to interfere and disturb the said decision. This Court cannot be said to be an expert in taking decisions regarding the manner and method of installation of transmission line.

5. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

6. The appeal, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed. (DR.NUPUR BHATI),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACJ

3-JayeshSoni/-