MAHABEER Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have come up with a prayer to command the Respondents not to interfere in their peaceful possession over their Plot Nos. 941. 944, 945 and 950 situate in Village Mohsinpur, Pargana, Tahsil & District Kanpur Nagar and not to make any construction over the aforementioned plots besides to award compensation for spoiling and ruining their paddy crops standing over the aforementioned plots by relying upon Petitioner No. 2 bearing Babu Lal v. The Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur Nagar & Others.

(2.) According to the petitioners, they are Bhumidhars of the aforementioned plots on which they had sown paddy crops; that the aforementioned plots were neither acquired nor requisitioned so as to give a handle to the respondents to interfere with their peaceful possession over the lands causing them wrongful loss, that on 6th September, 1993, respondent Nos. 3 and 4 forcibly entered the plots for making constructions for the purposes of high tension electric supply and spoiled and ruined their paddy crops causing a loss to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-, that they filed an application on 7.9.1993 in that regard with copies to all concerned including respondent Nos. 3 and 4 but without any result and hence this writ petition.

(3.) In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4, which has been sworn by Respondent No. 4, it has been stated, inter alia, that the plots in question stand recorded in the Khatauni in the name of Nagar Mahapalika, Kanpur, that a Scheme for 33 KVA line was duly sanctioned for supplying electricity from Panki to 33/11 KVA Sub-station Kalyanpur for which construction work started, that four electricity poles were erected on 13.4.1991 in exercise of the powers conferred on the UPSEB under the provisions of Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and Indian Electricity Act, 1910; that only electric wires are passing through the plots in question and for that purpose no acquisition or requisition of the plots is required or compensation is required to be paid, that it is totally wrong to say that the lands or the alleged paddy crops were spoiled or ruined that no loss whatsoever has been caused to the petitioners and accordingly the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.