Page No.# 1/8 GAHC010113812023 2025:GAU-AS:15209 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3142/2023 SHOHIDUR RAHMAN AND 2 ORS S/O LATE KHUDI SHEIKH, R/O VILL-SIMLABARI, P.O.-SIMLABARI, P.S.- LAKHIPUR, DIST-GOALPARA, ASSAM 2: NOUSHAD ALI S/O LATE KHUDI SHEIKH R/O VILL-SIMLABARI P.O.-SIMLABARI P.S.-LAKHIPUR DIST-GOALPARA ASSAM 3: CHAN MIAH S/O LATE KHUDI SHEIKH R/O VILL-SIMLABARI P.O.-SIMLABARI P.S.-LAKHIPUR DIST-GOALPARA ASSA VERSUS ASSAM ELECTRICITY GRID CORPORATION LIMITED AND 5 ORS A GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM UNDERTAKING DULY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BIJULEE BHAWAN, PALTAN BAZAR, GUWAHATI-781001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 2:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (T AND T) AEGCL BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-781001 Page No.# 2/8 3:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER GOALPARA TRANSMISSION DIVISION AEGCL AGIA-783120 4:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM POWER (ELECTRICITY) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 5:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA P.O. AND DIST- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-78310 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M M ZAMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AEGCL, SC, REVENUE,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 10-11-2025 1. Heard Mr.M.M.Zaman, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. K.Phukan, learned Standing counsel, Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited (AEGCL) for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Also heard Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent No. 5 and Mr. S.S.Roy, learned State counsel for the respondent No. 6. Page No.# 3/8 2. The present petition is filed against an action of the respondent authority in constructing 132KV high voltage overhead transmission line over the residential land of the petitioners without making proper assessment for compensation. 3. According to the petitioners, they were never given any opportunity of hearing before initiating the construction of the high voltage transmission cables over their residential houses which resulted in damage to the valuable properties. On 25.03.2022, they submitted individual representations before the respondent No. 6. i.e., the Deputy (District) Commissioner, Goalpara for adequate compensation. However, the same have not been considered and accordingly, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition. 4. The respondent AEGCL, who had constructed overhead transmission line, has filed an affidavit. It is the stand of AEGCL that the foundation and the erection works of 132KV, Agia-Hatisingimari Transmission Line at Simlabari area have been completed in the year 2019 and that during stringing work, it was observed that some houses have been constructed under the ROW of the aforesaid line. It is the further stand that the provisional notice was issued to the petitioner No. 1 on 16.03.2022. 5. In the said affidavit, the respondent AEGCL stated that the prayer petition submitted by the petitioners for compensation against construction of the said line was received from the Additional District Commissioner, Goalpara on 19.04.2022. The respondent AEGCL had deputed its Civil wings to assess the compensation of the standing houses of the petitioner No.1. However, he is not willing to receive the amount. Accordingly, a letter was issued to the Additional District Commissioner (LA), Goalpara requesting for assessment of land compensation including the standing house premises as per the Government norms and in terms of letter under No. AEGCL/AGM/TDG/Tech- 159/2021/232 dated 13.05.2022. 6. According to the respondent AEGCL, though the Circle Officer, Lakhipur Revenue Circle, Goalpara submitted the assessment report to the Additional District Commissioner Page No.# 4/8 (Revenue), Goalpara, however, in such report, no compensation amount was mentioned. Subsequently, the matter was intimated to the Additional District Commissioner (Revenue), Goalpara, as the respondent AEGCL did not receive any report from the concerned department. 7. The respondent AEGCL also approached the petitioners for completing the jumpering works near their plot of land, but they obstructed to do so demanding adequate compensation in the first place. Such issue was also intimated to the District Commissioner, Goalpara by a communication dated 27.03.2023. Thereafter, on advice of the District Commissioner, Goalpara, the respondent AEGCL completed the work and successfully charged the line on 28.04.2023 with the assistance of police. However, till date, they have not received any instruction from the District Commissioner, Goalpara, due to which, they have not been able to pay the compensation to the petitioners. 8. The District Commissioner, Goalpara has not filed any affidavit till date. 9. Mr. Roy, learned counsel representing the District Commissioner, Goalpara submits that as no copy of the affidavit filed by the AEGCL was served upon him, he could not complete his instruction. However, he submits that the District Commissioner, Goalpara shall do the needful in this regard, in view of the stand taken by the respondent authority and that the matter may be relegated to the District Commissioner, Goalpara to complete such exercise so that the compensation determined by the revenue authority can be paid to the petitioners. 10. I have given anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsels for the parties and have also gone through the materials available on record. 11. The guideline was issued on 15.11.2015 by the Ministry of Power, Government of India, which is necessary for adjudication of the matter and therefore, the same is quoted hereinbelow:- “No. 3/7/2015-Trans Page No.# 5/8 Government of India Ministry of Power Shram Shakti Bhawan Rafi Marg, New Delhi – 110001 Dated 15th October, 2015 To 1.Chief Secretaries/Administrators of all the States/ UTs. (As per list attached) 2. Chairperson, CEA, New Delhi with the request to disseminate the above guidelines to all the stakeholders. 3. CMD, PGCIL, Gurgaon. 4. CEO, POSOCO, New Delhi. 5. Secretary, CERC, New Delhi. 6. CMD of State Power Utilities/SEBs. Subject: Guidelines for payment of compensation towards damages in regard to Right of Way for transmission lines. During the Power Ministers Conference held on April 9-10, 2015 at Guwahati with States/UTs, it has, inter alia, been decided to constitute a Committee under the chairmanship of Special Secretary, Ministry of Power of analyse the issues related to Right of Way for laying of transmission lines in the country and to suggest a uniform methodology for payment of compensation on this count. Subsequently, this Ministry had constituted a Committee with representatives from various State Governments and others. The Committee held several meetings to obtain the views of State Governments on the issue and submitted its Report along with the recommendations (copy of the Report is at Annex-1)] 2. The Recommendations made by the committee are hereby formulated in the form of following guidelines for determining the compensation towards “damages” as stipulated in Section 67 and 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Section 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 which will be in addition to the compensation towards normal crop and tree damages. This amount will be payable only for transmission lines supported by a tower base of 66 KV and above, and not for sub-transmission and distribution lines below 66 KV:- (i) Compensation @ 85% of land value as determined by District Magistrate or any other authority based on Circle rate/Guideline value/ Stamp Act rates for tower base area (between four legs) impacted severely due to installation of tower/pylon structure; (ii) Compensation towards diminution of land value in the width of Right of Way (RoW) Corridor due to laying of Page No.# 6/8 transmission line and imposing certain restriction would be decided by the States as per categorization/type of land in different places of States, subject to a maximum of 15% of land value as determined based on Circle rate/guideline Value/Stamp Act rates; (iii) In areas where land owner/owners have been offered/accepted alternate mode of compensation by concerned corporation/Municipality under Transfer Development Rights (TDR) policy of State, the licensee/Utility shall deposit compensation amount as per (i) & (ii) above with the concerned Corporation Municipality/Local Body or the State Government. (iv) For this purpose, the width of RoW corridor shall not be more than that prescribed in the table at Annex-2 and shall not be less than the width directly below the conductors. 3. Necessary action may kindly be taken accordingly. These guidelines may not only facilitate an early resolution of RoW issues and also facilitate completion of the vital transmission lines through active support of State/UT administration. 4. All the States/UTs etc. are requested to take suitable decision regarding adoption of the guidelines considering that acquisition of land is a State subject. Yours faithfully, (Jyoti Arora) Joint Secretary(Trans.) Tele: 011-2371 0389” 12. The aforesaid guidelines clearly specify that determining the compensation towards “damages” as stipulated under Sections 67 and 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Sections 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 are in addition to the compensation towards normal crop and tree damages. Further the said guidelines are effective for transmission lines supported by a tower base of 66 KV and above. 13. Further, the genuineness of the claim of the individual petitioners is a factor which is to take note by the authorities. Normally, such genuineness of the claim is the subject of the Land Revenue Officials of the concerned district under the State of Assam. 14. In the present case, the Principal Secretary to the Revenue Department, Government of Assam is impleaded as one of the respondents. In my considered view, necessary directions can be issued to the District Commissioner, Goalpara to scrutinize the claim of the individual petitioners. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with Page No.# 7/8 the following directions:- (i) The individual petitioners shall approach the District Commissioner, Goalpara specifying and identifying the land which falls within the Right of Way (RoW) of the transmission lines whereafter, the District Commissioner, Goalpara shall verify the genuineness of the claim through the concerned Circle Officer and in the event, their claims are found to be genuine, the damages shall be assessed as per the guidelines. For the measurement of tower base, the materials shall be collected from AEGCL. (ii) If any of the petitioners are aggrieved by the assessment made by the District Commissioner, Goalpara, the petitioners shall take necessary shelter under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 thereby, moving the territorial District Judge for enhancement of the damages inasmuch as in order to invoke the jurisdiction by the territorial District Judge, under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, there must be a dispute in respect of the compensation. Similarly, if the respondent AEGCL is aggrieved on the assessment made by the District Commissioner, Goalpara, it shall also be at liberty to approach the District Judge concerned. (iii) If the District Authority had already assessed the compensation and the petitioners are not satisfied, they may approach the concerned territorial District Judge under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. 15. Mr. Zaman, learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that vide Notification No. PEL.2019/2015/91 dated 10.03.2017 issued by the Government of Assam, Power (Electricity) Department, the guideline dated 15.10.2015 issued by the Ministry of Power, Central Government of India had made its application restricted to the extent of new Page No.# 8/8 transmission line/projects where construction started after 15.10.2015. There is no doubt to that effect but in order to make the basis of assessment, the guidelines can be taken into consideration keeping in view the technicality involved in the issue of determination of the compensation inasmuch as the said compensation cannot be equated with the one under the Land Acquisition Act as in most of the cases, ownership of the land shall always remain with the petitioners except the area of land under the tower base, which shall have to be abandoned. 16. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant