IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 20615 of 2008 Between: 1 V. Pratap Reddy S/o. Chandra Reddy R/o. Burugupalli Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District. 2 V. Sujatha W/o. Pratap Reddy R/o. Burugupalli Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District. 3 L. Vijayavardhan Reddy S/o. Pratap Reddy R/o. Burugupalli Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District. 4 V. Sreenivas Reddy S/o. Krishna Reddy R/o. Burugupalli Village, Gajwel Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Chief Engineer, APTRANSCO, Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 The Executive Engineer, APTRANSCO, Nizamabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in erecting the high power electric poles in the petitioners land in Sy.Nos.336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343 and 349 situated at Thipparam Village, Kandapaka Mandal, Siddipet Revenue Division, Medak District, without initiating Land Acquisition Proceedings or issuing notice as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to erect the high power electric poles in the petitioners' land in Sy.Nos.336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343 and 349 situated at Thipparam Village, Kandapaka Mandal, Siddipet Revenue Division, Medak District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.PRASANNA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: O.MANOHAR REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 20615 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁeld seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the respondents in erecting high power electric poles in the land situated in Sy.Nos. 336 to 343 and 349 of the Thipparam Village, Kandapaka Mandal, Siddipet Revenue Division, Medak District without initiating the Land Acquisition proceedings is arbitrary and illegal. The Executive Engineer, APTRANSCO ﬁled a counter aﬃdavit stating that the APTRANSCO proposed to lay 220 KV EHT line from 400 KV sub station Gajwel to Kamareddy and the said proposal has been published in A.P. Gazette Part II (Extraordinary) No.119 dated 18-06- 2005. A notiﬁcation was also issued which was published in the Indian Express and Andhra Jyoti daily on 18-05-2005 informing the public with regard to the laying of electrical line as per the guidelines of Indian Electricity Act. Accordingly, a survey was conducted during July 2006 by M/s. National Remote Sensing Agency Hyderabad and the proposal was approved by APTRANSCO in October, 2007. After due approval, work of laying of electrical line commenced during November, 2007 and 60% of the work has been completed and out of three towers, two electrical towers have already been erected. It is explained that the course of the electrical line has been ﬁxed after conducting survey and since major part of the work is completed, it is not possible to change the same. However, the Department would compensate the petitioners for any loss of crop due to the movement of lorries. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondents. The law is well settled that so far as erection of poles for the purpose of transmission lines it is not necessary to acquire the land. However, in the process, if any of the structures or trees standing on the land are affected, the owner shall be paid compensation. As could be seen from the counter aﬃdavit, the respondents have followed the prescribed procedure by publishing the notiﬁcation in the A.P. Gazette as well as in the local dailies informing the public with regard to laying of electrical lines. The respondents have also undertaken in their counter aﬃdavit to pay the compensation to which the petitioners are entitled to, in case there is any loss to the crop or other structures standing on the land of the petitioners. In the circumstances, recording the statement of the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to pay the compensation to which the petitioners are entitled to as per law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 20-10-2008 KLP