1 / 5 2025:CGHC:8691 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1180 of 2022 1. Gajanand Dewangan S/o Bhukhan Lal Dewangan, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Buchi Hardi Post Baloda District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1. M/s Power Grid Corporation Of India Ltd Through its General Manager 765/400 K.V. Sub Station Urga, Bhaisama Road In front Of Govt. Collage Bhaisma P.S. Bhaisma District Korba 2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Janjgir, District - Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Janjgir, District - Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from the Case Information System) For Petitioner :Mr. K. N. Nande, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents/State :Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer Order on Board By Bibhu Datta Guru, J. 19/02/2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioner, who is claiming himself to be the owner of land bearing Khasra No.339 admeasuring 0.210 Hectare 2 / 5 situated at PH No. 16, village Charpara, Tahsil Baloda, District Janjgir- Champa, seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities to pay the amount of compensation, as they have erected power transmission tower on the land of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that earlier the land bearing Khasra No.339 admeasuring 0.210 Hectare situated at PH No. 16, village Charpara, Tahsil Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa was in the name of the father of the petitioner namely; Bhukhal Lal Dewangan. The respondent No.1 erected the power transmission tower on the said land without making any payment of compensation towards the land which was used for the said installation of tower. By referring the Muawja Patrak ( मुआवजा प्ቔक) dated 12/02/2007 filed by respondent No.1, learned counsel would submit that the compensation towards the loss of crop has been paid whereas no amount of compensation towards the land has been paid to the petitioner. Further referring the document Annexure P/7, learned counsel would submit that in the year 2019, the respondent No.1 paid the compensation towards the land of other land owners, whose lands have been used for erection of towers. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for compensation for the effected land. 3. (a) Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1, on the other hand, would submit that the writ petition is not maintainable as for the quantum of compensation, which was awarded in lieu of erection of towers under the Telegraph Act, 18851, and in respect of any dispute as to the sufficiency of compensation can be raised by the effected land 1 henceforth ‘the Act’ 3 / 5 owner before the District Judge as per the provisions of Section 16 of the Act and the claim for insufficient compensation cannot be decided in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (b) In reply to the submission made by the petitioner that in year 2019, several other land owners whose lands were used, the amount of compensation has been awarded in respect of their effected land is concerned, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 would submit that the land of the petitioner was used for erection of tower in the year 2007 and the cases referred by the petitioner vide Annexure P/7 are of the year 2019. Earlier, there was no provision for payment of compensation towards the effected land, however, in the meanwhile, the Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Government of Chhattisgarh has issued a circular dated 1.6.2016 by making a provision for grant of compensation towards the effected land on which the power transmission towers are installed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and the documents. 5. Perusal of relief clause of the writ petition, it is manifest that the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent to pay compensation towards the land, which is used for erection of electricity transmission tower. The land of the petitioner has been used for the purpose of erection of power transmission tower and the respondent has already compensated the petitioner by issuance of Muawja Patrak ( मुआवजा प्ቔक) dated 12/02/2007. It appears from the said document that 4 / 5 the land of the petitioner/his father bearing Khasra No.339 is mentioned and regarding loss of crops the amount of compensation has been assessed and the same has been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner never questioned the quantum of compensation by availing the remedy as may be available to him under Section 16 of the Act. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on 24/02/2022 i.e. after period of about one and half decade and again raised a claim by filing some documents subsequently showing that in the year 2019 some of the land owners have been granted compensation for their respective effected lands and hence the petitioner is entitled for land compensation. 6. As far as the compensation of effected land, which is filed by the petitioner as Annexure P/7 is of the year 2019. The petitioner failed to produce any rules or provisions showing that he and his father have entitled for compensation in respect of his effected land also in the year 2007 whereas the respondent No.1 by referring the circular of the State Government dated 01/06/2016 contended that the State has framed the provision for grant of compensation towards the effected lands also and hence the petitioner cannot equate himself at par with the cases of other land owners who have been granted the compensation in the year 2019 pursuant to the circular 1.6.2016. The said circular is not at all applicable in the case at hand, as the subject tower has been installed on the land of the petitioner one and half decade back and even the compensation towards loss of crop has also been assessed and paid to the petitioner in the year 2007 itself, which has duly been accepted by the petitioner. 5 / 5 7. As a result, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority, in accordance with law, if he is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Gowri K GOWRI SANKARA RAO Digitally signed by K GOWRI SANKARA RAO Date: 2025.02.20 16:19:24 +0530