IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 15497 of 2008 Between: K. Subba Raju, S/o. Venkateswarlu, R/o.M.V.P. Colony, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintending Engineer, TLC Circle,A.P. Transco, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District. 2 The Chief Engineer, A.P. Transco, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District. 3 A.P. Transco, Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularlhy one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in trying to erecting the electric pillars for purpose of laying the high-tension wires in the land of the petitioner extent of 7647 sq. yards situated in Sy.No. 51/5 of Jaggarajupeta, Visakhapatnam without following due process of law as arbitrary, illegal and consequently direct the respondents not to erect the electric pillars for the purpose of laying the high tension wires in the land of the Petitioner without following dur process of law and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.BALAJI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY The Court made the following at the stage of admission : ORAL ORDER: Apprehending and alleging potential dispossession/interference with his property in an extent of 7647 sq.yds in Sy.No.51/5 of Jaggarajupeta, Visakhapatnam District from the respondents, by way of erecting poles for laying ‘High Tension’ wires without following the due process of law, the writ petition is filed. In respect of such a grievance, the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy by way of a proceeding before a civil court of competent jurisdiction. In view of the availability of an alternative remedy very proximally to the petitioner’s habitat and proximal to the cause of action, this Court is not inclined to entertain this grievance. The Writ Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Company, with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the appropriate alternative remedy before a civil court of competent jurisdiction. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 18.7.2008 cvm