Pet it ioners v. The Dist rict Magist rat e, Tehri Garhwal Ot hers

Per cont ra, Mr. Vikas Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for t he respondent no. 2, subm it s t hat on 10.2.2017, a public not ice was published not only in t he official gazet t e of Cent ral Governm ent but t wo local newspapers, however neit her pet it ioners nor any ot her person, having int erest in t he m at t er filed obj ect ion and since no- one obj ect ed t o t he proposed alignm ent , t herefore, t he Cent ral Elect ricit y Aut horit y and t he Cent ral Governm ent grant ed necessary approval t o t he proposed alignm ent . He furt her subm it s t hat approval under Sect ion 164 of The Elect ricit y Act was grant ed t o respondent no. 2 on

1.11.2017 and respondent no. 2 deposit ed a sum of ₹31.5 crores for getting forest clearance from Minist ry of Environm ent , Forest and Clim at e Change, Governm ent of I ndia. He furt her subm it s t hat now it is t oo lat e in t he day t o request for change in alignm ent as approvals from different st at ut ory bodies have already been obt ained and laying of t ransm ission line is at t he final st age and any alt erat ion in t he alignm ent at t his st age will not only delay t he proj ect but it will also result in cost overrun of t he proj ect .

4. Learned Counsel t he pet it ioners, however, subm it s t hat t he writ pet it ion was filed in t he m ont h of June, 2025 and aft er filing of t he writ pet it ion, respondent no. 2 has erect ed t ower no. 54 over Khasra No. 644.

5. This Court is not inclined t o go int o t he rival cont ent ions raised on behalf of t he part ies as disput ed 4 quest ions of fact cannot be gone int o in a writ pet it ion. While exercising power of j udicial review, t his Court will not sit in j udgm ent over decision t aken by expert s regarding alignm ent of elect ricit y t ransm ission line. Sect ion 16( 1) of The I ndian Telegraph Act , 1885 perm it s t he Dist rict Magist rat e t o int ervene in case of resist ance obst ruct ion laying t elegraph/ t ransm ission line. However, t he provision is silent regarding hearing t o t he land owner. Therefore, having regard t o t he fact s of t he case, it is provided t hat respondent no. 2, if approaches t he Dist rict Magist rat e under Sect ion 16( 1) of The I ndian Telegraph Act , t hen Dist rict Magist rat e shall provide opport unit y of hearing t o pet it ioners before passing any order. Sect ion 17 of The I ndian Telegraph Act , 1885 provides cert ain safeguards/ right s t o t he land owners, t herefore pet it ioners shall be at libert y t o seek enforcem ent of t hose right s by approaching t he com pet ent aut horit y.

6. Wit h t he observat ions as above, writ pet it ion st ands disposed of. ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.) 2 5 .8 .2 0 2 5 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR 5