AB MAJID ZARGER Vs. STATE
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Ab Majid Zarger
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) IMPUGNED in this appeal is order dated 26.11.2005 purporting to have been passed by Principal District Judge Budgam whereunder while vacating
the earlier status quo order dated 23.04.2006 passed on interim
injunction application he refused injunctive relief to appellant as
prayed for, with the observation that construction of towers in suit land
be under taken only after commencing acquisition proceedings or private
negotiations for acquisition of the land.
(2.) IN the circumstantial back drop, it appears that appellant who owes a parcel of land measuring 3 kanals 10 1/2 marlas u/s no. 279/104 of
Village Sheikhpora Tehsil Budgam apprehending unauthorized use of his
land by respondents for erection of towers for lying the transmission
line of electricity used to have them restrained from doing so unless the
said parcel of land was duly acquired. Along with the suit he filed an
ancillary application for interim relief which was disposed of vide
impugned order aforementioned and hence the appeal.
(3.) GROUNDS pleaded are that course of transmission line required to be laid over the proposal tower was being changed in violation of the
original plan so as to run through petitioner's aforementioned land which
besides depriving him of the only parcel of residential land, also
violates his rights thereto, particularly because of respondents' refusal
to duly acquire the land for the purpose, if at all required and as such
the impugned order of allowing respondents to raise the tower besides
being voilative of law also disposes of the petitioner's suit in the
interim application, even as the parcel of land was not suitable for
laying down the transmission line for being hazards to general public
etc. During course of his threshold arguments the appellants counsel has
further contended that learned trial Judge while passing the impugned
order did not appreciate the factual aspects in their proper context and
landed into an error by passing the impugned order etc.
I have heard learned counsel and gone through the memo of appeal, and the impugned order appended therewith. In so far as
petitioners apprehension that the transmission line from over his land
would be hazards to general public is concerned, the same cannot be
acknowledged because the course of transmission line must have been
determined by engineering experts after thorough consideration of all
aspects involved and it would be unwise for any court to substitute the
expert opinion by its own, particularly in as highly intricated a matter
as laying of the transmission line with highest voltage electric current.
So it is the expert opinion that must prevail in the matter, unless
dislodged by a more expert opinion.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.