Order on Board

04 .04.2024

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):-

“10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash challenging the entire Revenue proceeding – Revenue case no. 202312042100127, B-121/2023-24 village Burdaputi P.H.No. 16, acquisition of the land of the petitioner for taking heavy tower line (220k.v.) over the land of the petitioner Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited from 132/33 K.V. sub centre Kondatarai to 33 K.V. Basantpur Feeder for River Crossing so far it relates to the petitioner.

10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant appropriate compensation to grant appropriate compensation to the petitioner for the loss sustained.

10.3 That, any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the present facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.”

2. The facts of the present case are that the petitioner is a owner of the land bearing survey No. 467/1 ad-measuring 0.040 hectare, situated at Village Bardaputi, P.H.

No. 16, Tahsil and District Raigarh (C.G.). The above-stated land is agricultural and is the only source of income for the petitioner. Respondent CSPDCL started procedure for taking heavy tower line (220 K.V.) over the land of the petitioner. The respondent authorities have acquired the land of the petitioner without any prior intimation or permission of the petitioner or granting proper compensation. The petitioner moved an application before the respondents No. 2 and 3 for grant of proper compensation.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is aged about 59 years and the land bearing survey No. 467/1 ad-measuring 0.040 hectare, situated at Village Bardaputi, P.H. No. 16, Tahsil and District Raigarh (C.G.) is an agricultural land. He would further submit that the petitioner does not have any other source of income except the aforesaid land and even if the petitioner is compensated with the lump-sum amount, it is not possible for the petitioner to start a new business. He would also submit that the land in question for spreading the line of power distribution is against the law laid down in the Electricity Act and the other prevalent Acquisition Laws.

4. Learned counsel for respondents would submit that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered with the order dated 23.02.2024 passed by this Court in WPC No. 4848 of 2023 (M/s. Kalyani Ispat Limited vs. Union of India and Ors.).

5. I have heard counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents present on record.

6. Some provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 would be relevant for the disposal of the present petition. Those are reproduced herein below for reference:-

(i) Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short ‘the Act, 2003’) deals with the exercise of powers of Telegraph Authority in certain cases. Section 164 reads as under:-

"164. (Exercise of powers of Telegraph Authority in certain cases).―The Appropriate Government may, by order in writing, for the placing of electric lines or electrical plant for the transmission of electricity or for the purpose of telephonic or telegraphic communications necessary for the proper co-ordination of works, confer upon any public officer, licensee or any other person engaged in the business of supplying electricity under this Act, subject to such conditions and restrictions, if any, as the Appropriate Government may think fit to impose and to the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, any of the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under that Act with respect to the placing of telegraph lines and posts for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained, by the Government or to be so established or maintained."

(ii) The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 came into force on 22.07.1885. The main object of the bill was to give power to the Government and to any company or person licensed under S