IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No.513 / 2007 Date of decision:17.3.2010 A.D. Hydro Power Ltd ….Petitioner Versus State of HP & ors ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B,Misra, Judge. For the Petitioner: Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG 1 & 3 to 6 For Respondent No.2 Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.(Oral) Writ petition has been filed mainly with the following prayers: (i) Respondents may kindly be directed to ensure that petitioner company is able to carry out its transmission work ( as described in para 6 of the petition) of the Time bound 192 MW Hydro Electric Power Project peacefully inspite of the objections of the owners/occupiers/any person claiming any interest on the land over which the towers are to be constructed; (ii) Respondents may kindly be directed to make available to the petitioner, lands where the Towers as per its approved scheme/surveys are to be erected and the transmission lines are to be laid out; (iii) The respondents may kindly be directed to specify any agency/officer with which the petitioner company is to deposit the compensation for the damage to the land over which the transmission towers of the Project are proposed to be erected. Any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in this behalf, may also kindly be passed. This is a project which started in the year 2001 for a hydro electric project in District Kullu. Originally, it was scheduled to commence commercial operation on 1.6.2008. In view of the insurmountable difficulties faced by the petitioner, this writ petition was filed and thanks to the various orders passed by this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could proceed with the work and what remains is only erection of a few towers and stringing of the transmission lines in a few areas. There was an initial objection on the part of the respondents and the people, to the effect that in view of the operation of Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy & Land Reforms Act, 1972, without prior sanction from the Government, the petitioner cannot become the owner of the agricultural land in Himachal Pradesh. But we find that this Court has made it clear in its order dated 6.9.2007 that “After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at great length, we do wish to observe and direct that in so far as the issue of erection of transmission towers and the laying of the transmission lines is concerned, Section 118 (supra) is neither attracted nor applicable. This provision of law, therefore, cannot be invoked any one to the prejudice of the petitioner.” Obviously, the petitioner does not become the owner of the land. The use is only for erection of the tower and stringing the lines. That is why this Court made it clear that Section 118 cannot be of any application as far as laying of towers or stringing of the transmission lines are concerned, in case the petitioner has executed the required agreements with the land owners concerned. Therefore, we make it clear even at the risk of redundancy that no Deputy Commissioner or for that matter any authority shall take recourse to Section 118 in raising any objection in the matter of the petitioner erecting transmission towers and stringing lines in case petitioner has entered into an agreement with the land owners concerned for the said activity. In case there is any dispute with regard to the compensation, it is a matter to be settled by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 10 read with Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. There will be a direction to the Deputy Commissioners, Kullu, Mandi, Bilaspur and Solan to dispose of any application pending in that regard within a period of one month from the date of production of the copy of this judgment. The petitioner may also apprise the Civil Courts regarding the ouster of jurisdiction of Civil Court in exercise of the powers by the Telegraph Authority under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 so that the developmental project may not be unnecessarily and unduly delayed. We direct the State Government and all the authorities concerned to render a helping hand to the petitioner so that the developmental project, which was originally scheduled to commence commercial operation on 1.6.2008, is able to commence the commercial production at least by 1.6.2010. Submission of the petitioner that they are ready to deposit the compensation with the Deputy Commissioner forthwith is recorded. The writ petition is disposed of. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice March 17, 2010(s/sl) ( Justice R.B. Misra ), Judge