IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 146 of 2004 & CWP No. 1195 of 2004. Decided on: 13.8.2008. _____________________________________________________________ CWP No. 146 of 2004 Power Grid Corporation of India and another. … Petitioners. Versus B.R. Verma and others. … Respondents. _____________________________________________________________ CWP No. 1195 of 2004: B.R. Verma and another. … Petitioners. Versus Union of India and others. … Respondents. _____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 CWP No. 146 of 2004: For the Petitioners : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. For respondent No. 1 : Mr. G.D. Verma, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Romesh Verma, Advocate. For respondent No.3 : Mr. Anup Rattan, Central Government Counsel. For respondent No.4 : Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Vikas Rathor, Dy.A.G. CWP No. 1195 of 2004: For the Petitioners : Mr. G.D. Verma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate. For respondent No.1 : Mr. Anup Rattan, Central Government Counsel. For respondents No.2 & 3 : Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Vikas Rathor, Dy.A.G. For respondents No. 4 & 5 : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. __________________________________________________________________ 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these writ petitions, they were heard together and decided by a common judgment. CWP No. 146 of 2004: A challenge has been laid by way of this petition to the award dated 22.12.2003 passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla in Petition No. 9-S/2 of 2000. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioner-Corporation, hereinafter referred to as the Corporation for convenience sake, has laid 400 KV Jhakri- Abdullapur transmission line. While laying down transmission line, 19 biswas of land belonging to the respondents No. 1 & 2 comprised in Khasra Nos. 362/1 and 397/362/1 situate in Mauza Kharki, Tehsil Kotkhai, District Shimla, was damaged. The Corporation while laying down the transmission line had uprooted 31 apple plants of the respondents in the year 1997 and had partially damaged 21 fruit bearing trees. They were paid a sum of Rs. 24,679/- by way of compensation by the Corporation. The respondents filed petition No. 9-S/2 of 2000 in the Court of learned District Judge, Shimla under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraphs Act, 1885 read with Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act for the grant of compensation. The learned District Judge awarded a sum of Rs. 98,716/- towards damages in respect of 31 apple plants which had been damaged during the course of laying down the transmission line by the Corporation vide award dated 22.12.2003. 3 Mr. Bimal Gupta, learned counsel has strenuously argued that the award dated 22.12.2003 is not sustainable in the eyes of law. CWP No. 1195 of 2004: The present petition has been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the compensation on the principles of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Mr. G.D. Verma, learned counsel in support of CWP No. 1195/2004 has strenuously argued that the learned District Judge should have taken into consideration the principles of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 while awarding compensation for the damages caused to the apple trees owned by the petitioners while laying down the transmission line. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of both the writ petitions carefully. It is not disputed by the parties that the land measuring 19 biswas always remained in possession of the claimants. The only issue required to be decided by the learned District Judge was to what compensation the claimants were entitled for the damages caused while laying down the transmission line. The claimants had been paid a sum of Rs. 24,679/- for the damages of 31 apple trees caused by the Corporation. In fact the claimants had sought compensation for the loss of 31 apple trees and also 21 other plants which were partially damaged. They had only been paid a sum of Rs. 8,282/- as compensation by the Corporation for causing partial damage to 21 trees. The learned District Judge has taken a note of the pleadings of the parties and had rightly concluded that since there was no reference to these 21 extra plants, the 4 compensation was confined only to the damages caused to 31 plants. The learned District Judge has relied upon the formula known as ‘Harbans Singh Formula’ while awarding compensation to the respondents. He has also relied upon the ratio of the judgment rendered in Union of India and others Vs. Khazana Ram and others, 1998 (1) Shimla Law Cases 479. The findings recorded by the learned District Judge call for no interference. The learned District Judge has rightly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence placed and proved on record by the parties. The contention of Mr. G.D. Verma, learned counsel that the claimants are entitled to compensation on the principles based on the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is not tenable. The claim petition has been filed under Section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 read with Section 51 of the Indian Electricity Act. The claimants are not entitled to get the assessment made on the principles enshrined under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and ‘Harbans Singh Formula’ has been rightly applied by the learned District Judge along with ratio of Khazana Ram’s case (supra) while awarding compensation. Consequently, in view of the observations made hereinabove, there is no merit in the writ petitions and the same are dismissed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. August 13, 2008. (cr)