S.S.NIJJAR, J. - (1.) THIS petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction especially in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents, especially respondent No. 3 not to erect high power tension line tower in the land/premises belonging to the petitioner.
(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that he owns agricultural land comprising in Rect. No. 62 Khasra No. 10/1 and 10/2 in village Badshahpur Tehsil and District Gurgaon. At the relevant time, crops were standing on the land. He is a resident of Delhi and has agricultural land in village Badshahpur. The scheme for installation of transmission line from village Badshahpur to Jaipur by-pass Sector 10 Gurgaon was originally sanctioned by respondents and the said transmission line was passing over the premises of Golf Country Club, Sohana Road, Gurgaon. The respondents, at the instance of Golf Club prepared alternative route of the transmission line without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 28 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and also Indian Telegraph Act, 1955. The alteration of the route plan was challenged in this Court by one Tahar Singh vide Civil Writ Petition No. 16104 of 1998. This petition was admitted on 14.10.1998. While issuing notice of motion, respondents were directed not to lay the electricity cable in accordance with the impugned plan. Thereafter, one Vijay Singh filed CWP No. 684 of 1999 which was allowed by this Court by order dated 8.4.2000. The respondents were directed not to erect the high power tension line in the agricultural land near the residential house of Vijay Singh, the petitioner therein. It was, however, clarified that the petition has been allowed on the ground that there was non-compliance of the provisions of Sections 28 and 29 of the Electricity (Supply) Act with regard to the revised scheme. The respondents were granted the liberty either to arrive at settlement by negotiations with petitioner or issue a modified scheme after following the procedure prescribed under Sections 28 and 29 of the Act. It is also the case of the petitioner that in gross violation of the order passed by this Court, respondents again proceeded to erect transmission line over the land of the petitioner (Vijay Singh) in CWP No. 684 of 1999. He was, therefore, constrained to file another writ petition, namely, CWP No. 1938 of 2001. It was contended that the modified scheme as published under Section 29(2) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 did not contain the khasra number of the land belonging to the petitioner therein, and therefore, no objections could be filed. On 12.2.2001 a Division Bench of this Court issued Notice of Motion for 10.5.2001. It was also directed that meanwhile, digging operation on the land of the petitioner therein will remain stayed. Now the petitioner, who lives in Delhi, has been informed by his farm attendants that respondents are prepared to dig in his fields for erection of the towers for the electricity supply line. The petitioner all along entertained the belief that laying of electrical cable has been stayed by this Court by various orders appended with the writ petition. He, therefore, made enquiries and came to know that respondents had published a notification in a daily newspaper on 11.4.2001 wherein the land of the petitioner is also included in the proposed modified scheme for laying the electricity cable. Since the petitioner does not permanently reside in the village, he did not come to know about preparation and the publication of the modified scheme. Not knowing about the publication of the modified scheme, he has not filed any objections thereto. Therefore, the petitioner has even lost the right to file objections in terms of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. It is further pleaded that as per the provisions of Section 29 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, even the revised scheme cannot be executed without the approval of the Central Electricity Authority whereas the respondents have not obtained such approval from the authority as mentioned in Section 29 of the Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a perusal of the notification itself shows that the same has not been sanctioned as it is mentioned in the scheme that it shall be deemed to be sanctioned with or without modification by the Central Electricity Authority. According to the learned counsel, it was mandatory and obligatory for the respondents to obtain the sanction of the authority and only thereafter the same can be executed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that if the petitioner had been given the opportunity to submit the objections, he would have shown the respondents that the initial unrevised plan of the transmission line was 2.455 kms. in length whereas the revised plan would have a longer route of 2.815 kms. involving greater expenditure. Written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The respondents have stated that the 66 KV line proposed to pass from the lands belonging to villages Badshahpur, Fazilpur etc., is meant to supply electricity to large number of consumers consisting of domestic and commercial consumers of Section 10, Sector 9 and industries of Section 37 Part I and II and few other pockets in which agricultural consumers of Gurgaon are involved. This line will feed 66 KV Sub Stations, but work on some of them is held up due to litigation. The total population of the aforesaid sectors is suffering due to inadequate/shortage of power and low voltage resulting into frequent break downs in the existing temporary system for the last more than six years. The general public has been agitating due to inadequate and volatile supply of electricity. On the other hand, respondents are unable to release any new connection without the erection of 66 KV Sub Stations. It is further stated that even the essential services like water supply and hospitals are suffering on this account. The present plan to lay overhead 66 KV Line or Towers instead of underground cables in the land, was framed to meet the aforesaid urgent and essential demand. It is further stated that there is absolutely no construction either residential or industrial near the safe permissible limits through which 66 KV Line is proposed to feed the incoming 66 KV Sub Station is. It is further stated that if this line is not constructed, immediately it will become difficult, if not impossible for the department to provide normal/proper supply to all sections of the population. It is the case of the respondents that the notification has been validity issued under Section 29(2) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. Khasra numbers of the land in which the towers are to be erected have been duly mentioned. The notification has been published in leading newspapers viz., Indian Express and Rashtriya Sahara (Hindi Version) dated 11.4.2001. The notification provides that any licensee or other person interested can raise any objection and/or may make representation upon the above scheme within two months of the publication of this notification. No objection was received from any person within the prescribed period. Thus, the respondents are within their right to lay the H.T. Power Line. It is submitted by Mr. Gill on the basis of the pleadings in the written statement that the petitioner having not filed any objection during the stipulated period, cannot be permitted to challenge the scheme. Factually, the case put up by the petitioner to the effect that he was not aware of the notification as he lives in Delhi, is denied. It is stated that although the petitioner lives in Delhi, his land is being looked after by his attendants. Furthermore, the petitioner has brick-kilns in the adjoining land. He is a frequent visitor at the brick-kilns. With regard to the allegation that the original route was altered at the instance of the Golf Club, it is submitted that the Club had filed the civil suit and obtained interim relief. Since it was necessary to supply electricity to a large segment of the population and the litigation was likely to take a long time, a slight alteration was decided to be made with the approval of the competent authority. This alteration, however, required additional expenditure of Rs. 15.00 lacs. The Golf Club had agreed to deposit a sum of Rs. 15.00 lacs as compensation. This was deposited.
(3.) IT was further submitted by Mr. Gill that the decision in CWP No. 684 of 1999 is of no assistance to the petitioner as the High Court had allowed the same on the ground that there was non-compliance with Sections 28 and 29 of the Electricity (Supply) Act. With regard to writ petition, namely, CWP No. 1938 of 2001, it is submitted by Mr. Gill that after the decision in CWP No. 684 of 99, Vijay Singh had actually entered into a settlement with the respondents. It was, on the basis of this settlement that the respondents had started the digging work. The settlement had, however, remained only oral as Vijay Singh did not sing the same. Taking advantage of this Vijay Singh filed writ petition, namely, CWP No. 1938 of 2001 and got the order of stay. The notification dated 31.10.2000 which is the subject matter of the CWP No. 1938 of 2001, stands duty cancelled and is not being acted upon. The present notification which was issued on 10.4.2001, has been sanctioned in accordance with law. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.;