1 CGHC010156802020 2026:CGHC:32374 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1540 of 2020 1 - Praveen Dubey, Aged About 52 Years, S/o Chandra Kishore Dubey, Near Shiv Mandir, Nariyal Kothi Road, Dayalbandh, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - M/s Endless Vinimay Private Limited Mangoe Lane, 2nd Floor, Room No. 29, Kolkata (West Bengal) 700001 ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Commerce And Industries Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited Through Executive Engineer EHT (M) Division, CSPTCL Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector District Bilaspur Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Superintendent Of Police District Bilaspur Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.07.30 14:37:28 +0530 2 For Petitioners : Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Advocate. For State/Respondents No.1, 3 & 4. : Mr. Karan Bahrani, PL. For respondent No.2 : Mr. Raja Sharma, Advocate. SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 28/07/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1That, Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the case. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 and its officials to shift the location of the Power Transmission Cable Tower/ Location No.249 from the land owned by the Petitioner. 10.3 That, Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondent No.2 and its officials, that no new Power Transmission Cable Tower be erected/ constructed in the land, described in the petition, owned by the Petitioner. 10.4 That, in the event of non shifting of the existing and new Cable Tower directions for giving compensation under the provisions of Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 be issued because the entire land of the Petitioner will be rendered useless. 10.5 Any other relief(s) deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that the writ petition is not maintainable, however in the garb of the writ 3 petition, petitioner is seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation already deposited by respondent No.2. He also submits that the petitioner is having remedy to file proceedings before the appropriate authority as provided under the Indian Telegraph Act. 3. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the objection raised by respondent No.2, the writ petition may be disposed of permitting the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before appropriate authority. He further submits that further observation be made that delay may not come into the way of the petitioner to file the proceedings before the appropriate authority, if any. 4. On due consideration of submission of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail other alternate remedy available under the law for redressal of the grievance with regard to the compensation. In the event, the petitioner files proceedings as provided under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, it shall be considered in accordance with law, keeping in mind the pendency of the writ petition before this Court since 2020. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge gouri