1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.06.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD)Nos.370 and 833 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1,1,2 and 2 of 2011 R.Venuraj : Petitioner in W.P.370/2011 S.Dhanasekaran : Petitioner in W.P.833/2011 -Vs- 1.The Additional General Manager, Power Grid Corporation, Soundamini Plot No.2, Sector 29, Near I FF Co Chouk, Gurgoan - 122 001. 2.The Commissioner, Power Grid Corporation, Kinnimangalam, Checkkanoorani, Cholavandhan Road, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. : Respondents in both W.Ps. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.370 of 2011: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to stop further activities of erection works granting in Kallikudi Bit-1 Survey No.286/2A in Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.833 of 2011: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to stop further activities of erecting High Tension Electric Wire post in Kallikudi Bit-1 Survey No.269/8, 1.47 hectare Kallikudi Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. For Petitioner : M/s.D.Gurusamy For Respondents : Mr. Jayesh B. Dolia COMMON ORDER Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, both the writ petitions are taken up together for disposal and they are decided by this common order. 2. While W.P. (MD) No.370 of 2011 has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to stop further activities of erection works granting in Kallikudi Bit-1 Survey No.286/2A in Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District, W.P. (MD)No.833 of 2011 has https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to stop further activities of erecting High Tension Electric Wire post in Kallikudi Bit-1 Survey No.269/8, 1.47 hectare Kallikudi Village, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. 3. The respondent Corporation has filed a counter as well as vacate stay petition. The learned counsel for the respondents has brought to the notice of this Court that the work of drawing of line has to be carried out for about 154 kilometers and 423 towers have to be erected and in this particular case, in one particular area, the petitioners have been objecting and in spite of their objection, poles have already been erected and foundation has been made and also compensation insofar as the damage to the crops is concerned has already been assessed in one case, compensation is assessed and paid in another case and if at all there is any dispute insofar as the compensation is concerned, they can only agitate before the appropriate authority viz., the District Collector, as per Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act and therefore, the writ petition at this stage is not maintainable especially, when the petitioners have not challenged the very act of taking up the lines or erection of the towers. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would fairly submit that in one case, compensation has already been received by one of the co-owners in respect of the crops which were lying at that point of time and in the other case also, compensation has been arrived at, but, so far not paid. In view of this, he has submitted that the petitioners may be permitted to agitate the matter before the authority concerned for claiming the correct compensation as the entire land is put under peril. 5. Considering the limited request now made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and considering the fact that the writ petitions are filed only to the limited extent of restraining the respondents from taking lines and also the fact that the right of the Corporation or the authorities concerned is not challenged, the relief as claimed is not maintainable. However, the petitioners are given the option to move the appropriate authority under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act for seeking compensation for the land if they are entitled to the same under law. With the above observation, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. The interim injunction petitions in M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 1 of 2011 are dismissed and the vacate the order of status quo petitions in M.P.(MD)Nos.2 and 2 of 2011 are allowed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 TO 1.The Additional General Manager, Power Grid Corporation, Soundamini Plot No.2, Sector 29, Near I FF Co Chouk, Gurgoan - 122 001. 2.The Commissioner, Power Grid Corporation, Kinnimangalam, Checkkanoorani, Cholavandhan Road, Thirumangalam Taluk, Madurai District. +2ccs to Mr.Aiyar & Dolia, Advocate SR.Nos.19541 & 19542 W.P.(MD)Nos.370 and 833 of 2011 21.06.2011 srm PA/28.06.2011/3P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/