Arvind Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Arvind Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim relief continued: proposed action on erection of the power line stayed till next date of hearing (12th May, 2026); respondents 3 and 4 directed to file affidavit of competent authority on alignment; writ petition to be listed fresh on 12th May, 2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the alignment of the proposed electric line through the petitioners' property, with reference to the map disclosed in the petition, is arbitrary — the petitioners allege no notice was given to them to point out the arbitrariness — and whether the Court should interfere, including by interim stay of the proposed construction.

Court's answer

Interim direction: respondent nos. 3 and 4 to file an affidavit affirmed by the competent authority, who will take responsibility and state that there has been no deviation in the alignment and that it has been duly made with reference to the topography, dealing with the allegations in the petition including the map disclosed; the affidavit to be accepted on the adjourned date upon advance copy served.

Ratio / Principle

Interim interference is reiterated and will operate till the next date of hearing.

Key takeaways

Proposed action on erection of the power line will remain stayed till the next date of hearing, as the Court intends to dispose of the writ petition; matter to be listed on 12th May, 2026 as fresh.ratio¶20
Observation distinguishing the Supreme Court order in Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. (SLP(C) 12873-12874 of 2026): the status quo order there operated pending resolution of a dispute regarding ownership of the land, whereas here the Court asks for an affidavit on best alignment since the petitioner has alleged arbitrariness.obiter¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order dated April 28, 2026 (Arindam Sinha and Satya Veer Singh, JJ.) in Writ-C No. 14537 of 2026, Arvind Kumar and others vs. State of U.P. and others, challenging notice dated 3rd April, 2026 issued by respondent no. 4 (the transmission company) informing the petitioners of construction of an electric line scheduled to pass through their property. Petitioners allege, with reference to the map disclosed in the petition, that the alignment is arbitrary and that no notice was given to them to point out the arbitrariness. The Court directed respondent nos. 3 and 4 (the power corporation and the transmission company) to file an affidavit affirmed by the competent authority stating there has been no deviation in the alignment and that it was duly made with reference to the topography. Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 relied on the Supreme Court's order dated 15th April, 2026 in SLP(C) No. 12873-12874 of 2026 (Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Vijaybhai Thakorbhai Desai and others) staying a High Court status quo order dated 2nd March, 2026; the Court observed that order operated pending resolution of a dispute regarding ownership of land, unlike the present case where arbitrariness of alignment is alleged. Notification for transmission was made on 28th October, 2024. Interim interference was reiterated to operate till the next date; proposed erection of the power line was stayed; the respondent was referred to the judgment dated 17th April, 2026 in Writ-C No. 12247 of 2026 (Bhullan Singh vs. State of U.P.). Listed on 12th May, 2026 as fresh.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 14537 of 2026

Arvind Kumar And 3 Others

	Versus	.....Petitioner(s)
State Of U.P. And 3 Others		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Malika Kumar	Ahuja, Rakesh Garg, Yash Garg
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.,	Pratik J. Nagar
Court No.- 29

HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J.

Mr. Yash Garg, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners and submits, under challenge is notice dated 3rd April, 2026 issued by respondent no. 4 (the transmission company) informing his clients that there will be construction of electric line, scheduled to pass through their property. He hands up English translation of the notice with copy to Mr. Pratik J. Nagar, learned advocate appearing for respondent nos. 3 and 4 (the power corporation and transmission company). Mr. Garg submits, with reference of map disclosed in the petition the alignment, is arbitrary. No notice was given to his clients to point out the arbitrariness. He seeks interference. Mr. Raj Mohan Upadhyay, learned advocate, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, appears on behalf of State.

Respondent nos. 3 and 4 will file affidavit to be affirmed by the competent authority, who will take responsibility and say that there has been no deviation in the alignment and that it has been duly made with reference to the topography. The deponent will have reference to allegations made in the petition including the map disclosed. The affidavit will be accepted on adjourned date, upon advance copy served. Mr. Nagar seeks

WRIC No. 14537 of 2026

2

two weeks.

Mr. Nagar opposes interim interference. He relies on order dated 15th April, 2026 of the Supreme Court made in Special Leave to Appeal (C) no. 12873-12874 of 2026 (Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Vijaybhai Thakorbhai Desai and others) staying the status quo order dated 2nd March, 2026 made by the High Court. Paragraphs-1, 4 and 6 from the High Court's order are reproduced below.

"1. Learned senior advocate Mr. Mihir Joshi assisted by the learned advocate Mr. Isa Hakim appearing for the petitioner submits that there is a dispute in respect of the land on which the transmission tower is being erected. Learned senior advocate further submits that according to the petitioner, the land being survey No. 161 belongs to the petitioner, on which the transmission tower is being erected by the respondentCorporation.

4. Considering the submissions and the communication dated 19.02.2026 written by the DILR, Valsad to the respondent No. 3-Corporation. The respondent No. 2 is directed to undertake the measurement of survey No. 160 and determine its boundaries within a period of one week from today. The petitioner is also directed to remain present on the given date and time so that necessary procedure can be undertaken.

... ... ... ..."

6. In the meantime, till the DILR report is made available to this Court, the respondent No. 3 shall maintain status quo as on today in respect of the work done."

Status quo order restrained the transmission having so passed by the High Court pending resolution of dispute regarding ownership of the land. Here we are asking for an affidavit on

WRIC No. 14537 of 2026

3

best alignment since, petitioner has alleged arbitrariness. On query Mr. Nagar submits, notification for transmission was made on 28th October, 2024. On behalf of power and transmission company two weeks have been sought, for the affidavit. We reiterate our interim interference to operate till next date of hearing.

List on 12th May, 2026 as fresh. Proposed action on erection of the power line will remain stayed till next date of hearing, since we intend to dispose of the writ petition. Also, respondent might consider judgment dated 17th April, 2026 delivered in Writ-C no. 12247 of 2026 (Bhullan Singh vs. State of U.P.

(Arindam Sinha,J.)

(Satya Veer Singh,J.)

April 28, 2026

Shiraz

Digitally signed by :- SHIRAZ ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad