The petitioner sought to quash notices for transmission tower erection without land acquisition and direct payment of compensation. The Court held that a statutory remedy under the Indian Telegraph Act exists and disposed of the petition with liberty to approach the District Judge.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8169 of 2016
======================================================
Vibha Sinha W/o Late Ram Naresh Prasad Singh, resident of village- Kanhara Raghu, P.S. Bochaha, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suneil Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, GA 9 Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate Mr. Akhileshwar Singh, Advocate Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2024
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
notices dated 22.02.2016 and 28.04.2016 whereby petitioner has been informed that the Bihar State Electric Transmission Company Ltd. is authorized to make foundation of transmission towers erection and wire pulling without acquiring the land for which payment would be made for the damages done to the standing crops and trees, if any and further to direct the respondent authorities to make payment of the compensation amount to the petitioner for her land measuring an area of 22
Patna High Court CWJC No.8169 of 2016(2) dt.16-01-2024 2/3
decimals falling under Khesra No. 896, Khata No. 173 Thana No. 716 situated in village- Kanhara Raghu, P.S. Bochacha, District- Muzaffarpur.
as:
“Section 16. Exercise of powers conferred by section 10, and disputes as to compensation, in case of property other than that of a local authority.
(3) If any dispute arises concerning the sufficiency of the compensation to be paid under section 10, clause (d), it shall, on application for that purpose by either of the disputing parties to the District Judge within whose jurisdiction the property is situate, be determined by him.”
the above proposition.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8169 of 2016(2) dt.16-01-2024 3/3
disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the existence of a statutory alternative remedy?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vibha Sinha
The State Of Bihar
The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Muzaffarpur, East
The Circle Officer, Bochaha
The District Land Acquisition Officer, Muzaffarpur
Prabhat Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
