IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.18467 of 2011 BETWEEN K. Parvathi. ... PETITIONER AND M/s. Impex Metal & Ferro Alloys Ltd, Vizianagaram District and two others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. D. KANAKA SUNDAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE MR. D.V. NAGARJUNA BABU SMT. JYOTHI ESHWAR The Court made the following order: ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and learned counsel for the first respondent, who has filed the vacate petition. With the consent of the learned counsel the writ petition is being disposed of by this order. 2. The only issued involved in the writ petition being as to whether the petitioner is entitled to a Mandamus compelling the respondents to obtain the consent of the farmers before laying transmission lines, is on the face of it unsustainable as neither the Electricity Act nor the Indian Telegraphs Act supports the claim of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. This Court in K. SUBBA RAJU v. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TLC DIVISION, AP TRANSCO[1] already considered similar contention and it was held that no consent of the owner of the land through which the transmission lines are to be laid is required. I had also considered similar issue in WP.No.21608 of 2011 dated 26.08.2011 and rejected the petitioner’s contention therein. In view of that, the writ petition itself is devoid of merit and accordingly dismissed. The petitioner, however, shall be entitled to claim damages under Section 10 of the Indian Telegraphs Act, if and when such ingredients are fulfilled. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J August 30, 2011 DSK [1] 2010 (4) ALT 758