IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (PIL) No. 05 of 2010 Narayan Singh & Others ……… Petitioners. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others .………. Respondents. Mr. I.P. Gairola, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.C. Bisht, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Mr. B.D. Upadhyaya, Advocate for respondent No. 2. Date of decision: 13-04-2010 JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. KHEHAR, C. J. (Oral) Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 states, that it is not necessary to file any reply to the averments made in the writ petition, in as much as the controversy relates to respondent No. 2. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 states, that he has been instructed by the Executive Engineer, Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd., Haldwani, Nainital, i.e. respondent No. 2, that he does not wish to contest this petition. 3. In view of the above, since the prayer made in the instant writ petition, that a writ in the nature of prohibition be issued, directing the respondents not to construct the proposed power line through plot Nos. 329 and 330, which belongs to the petitioners, has not been opposed, a direction is hereby issued in the nature of writ of prohibition, restraining the respondents from constructing the proposed power line over plot Nos. 329 and 330 belonging to the petitioners. 4. The instant writ petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C. J.) 13.04.2010 13.04.2010 Amit