way back in the year 2017-18 and while executing the aforesaid work, certain fruit-bearing trees came under the alignment of the transmission line and, as such, they were required to be felled down. However, before felling the trees, due procedure was adopted by counting the fruit-bearing trees and forwarding the details thereof to the Chief Horticulture Officer, Budgam, for proper assessment of the damages. The Chief Horticulture Officer, Budgam, assessed the damages and submitted a detailed report to the Power Grid Corporation vide communication dated 20.09.2018. On receipt of the said assessment, payment was accordingly made to the petitioners through their bank accounts and they received the assessed amount without any protest or objection and also took away the wood of the felled trees, the cost whereof was deducted from the assessment made by the Chief Horticulture Officer, Budgam. Thus, the claim of the petitioners that adequate compensation was not paid to them is incorrect. Once the petitioners have accepted the compensation on the basis of the assessment made by the Chief Horticulture Officer, Budgam, they are estopped from throwing challenge to the assessment made by the Chief Horticulture Officer through the medium of present writ petition. It is also the stand of respondent No. 5 that
