GULABJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent, the appellant has assailed the impugned orders dated 26.9.2016 and 27.10.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing Civil Writ Petition No.5304 of 2016 filed by the petitioner (appellant herein) and disposing of Civil Misc. Application No. 13020-CWP of 2016, in CWP No. 5304 of 2016, whereby prayer for recalling of order dated 26.9.2016 was made.

(2.) Put pithily, the official respondents of Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited entered in the Contract Agreement/Resettlement and Rehabilitation Action Plan dated 1.07.2014 (Annexure P-2) with M/s K Ramachandra Rao Transmission and Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad (respondent no.4) for the construction of Towers and Transmission Lines leading from village Sonta to village Sonda, District Ambala. As per the aforementioned contract agreement, the names of the nearest villages along with the transmission lines were shown as "Sonta, Thol, Jugian, Neya Segti, Kelaren, Addo Majra, Khwaspur, Sulhraon, Gobindgarh, Martoi, Bhanukheri, Ladan, Dhurala Matheri Jatan and Sonda". As per clause 3.2.1 of the contract agreement dated 01.07.2014 (Annexure P-2), the proposed 22.05 KM LILO line had to be erected in between the existing sub-station at Sonta to Sonda sub-station. It traverses over agricultural land of 11 villages, namely, Sonta, Kaleran, Addo Majra, Khwasipur, Sumrd, Martri, Gobindgarh, Bhanokheri, Ladana, Matehri Jattan and Soda. In order to avoid impact on human habitation, the route of the proposed line was deviated at least 2-3 KMs away from the habitations of all these villages. In compliance of the contract/ agreement between the parties, a public notice (Annexure P-3) was published in the newspaper and at serial no.14 of 66 KV Transmission Line, the names of the Sonta-Sonda are described, which reads as follows:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_337_LAWS(P&H)3_2017_1.html</FRM>

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned orders dated 26.9.2016 and dated 27.10.2016, has taken into consideration this aspect that erection of electric lines through the land of the appellant is justified, inasmuch as the name of the village Ballana of the appellant does figure in the alignment zone of the transmission line as also does figure in the Contract Agreement/Resettlement and Rehabilitation Action Plan dated 01.07.2014 (Annexure P-2) and even in the public notice (Anneuxre P-3).