Judgment : The short facts of the case are as follows:- 1. The writ petitioner is the absolute owner of the land bearing Survey No.55/11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 1A, 1B, 1C, 4A, 5B, 6, 7A, 7B, 7C, 8A, 8C, 9A, 9B at Aananandhal Village, Madurampattu Post, Tiruvannamalai District, totally measuring to an extent of 5 acres of agricultural land. All revenue documents with respect of the aforesaid lands stand in his name. He is cultivating the aforesaid land for the past four decades and he has erected bore well as well as dug a well for irrigation purpose. Income from the agriculture is the only source of income to him to lead his life. The petitioner has planted sugarcane crops in the above said land and he had erected saplings of 300 rose wood, 400 red-sandal, in the year 2008 and 15 mango trees, 90 teak wood trees and they are aged about 20 years old. He further submits that the land is a good fertile land and yields well. Approximately 300 tones of sugarcane are being cultivated every year since 1990. When such are the facts, in the year 2010, the respondents had given proposal that they are going to erect high voltage electricity grid in his property. Initially he had objected the same as the authority wanted his agricultural land which is very good cultivating land, but all his efforts to stop them went in vain as the enforcement authority also joined along with the respondents. Finally the respondent had ruined the sugarcane which was about 7 months yield and that would have yielded well in couple of months. Not stopping their activity and under the guise of enforcing the authority vested on them, the respondents had cut all the valuable trees which are aged about 20 years for erecting the high voltage grid in his land. On account of the aforesaid erection, he had faced huge loss and mental agony and most of his valuable land as well as the trees have been spoiled by the respondents on account of their cruel and arbitrary acts. 2. The petitioner further submits that the respondents have already taken his lands and erected the big grid in his land and the remaining land is being used by him for cultivating crops. 2. The petitioner further submits that the respondents have already taken his lands and erected the big grid in his land and the remaining land is being used by him for cultivating crops. It has taken much pain for him to come out of the damage caused by the respondents both mentally as well as physically. He further submits that he has already suffered loss by the respondents' project and his entire agriculture activity was paralyzed on account of the act of the respondent by erecting the high voltage grid. While that being so, on 02.06.2014, all of a sudden, the respondents once again entered into his lands which had not been demanded by them earlier and tried to dig the land without any notification or prior notice. The same was prevented by the village people as the respondents had entered his land illegally. The State and its authorities cannot take law in their hands and deprive poor village people and the agriculturist of their hard earned lands and cannot spoil the land and the crops planted on it. He further submits that on enquiry with the respondents, the third respondent has replied that the existing Grid which they have already installed was wrongly erected by them on account of which they are facing some action and therefore, they are unauthorizedly encroaching and intruding on his lands for erecting the new Grid and as such, the work is being carried by them without any notice to him or without any sanction or authority. 3. The petitioner further submits that his property has already suffered a lot on account of installation of existing Grid and after the above said process of the respondents, he has done reclamation of the remaining land after spending several lakhs and cultivating the same. While so all of a sudden on 02.06.2014, the second and third respondents without any notice threatened him to vacate the land immediately under the guise of erecting new Grid. The act of the respondent in unauthorizedly trespassing into his lands without any notice is illegal and unconstitutional. The rights conferred on the citizens under Article 330 A of the Constitution of India cannot be infringed or taken away by the State and its authorities without following the procedure contemplated under law. The act of the respondent in unauthorizedly trespassing into his lands without any notice is illegal and unconstitutional. The rights conferred on the citizens under Article 330 A of the Constitution of India cannot be infringed or taken away by the State and its authorities without following the procedure contemplated under law. The petitioner further submits that the respondents have neither issued notice to him nor issued any notification regarding their requirement or his properties which were not the subject matter of their earlier requirement. The petitioner cannot be penalized for the mistake or error committed by the respondent. The respondents are not justified in intruding into petitioner's property without putting them on notice. It is too fundamental that the occupants of land cannot be forcibly disturbed without putting them on notice. Without even issuing notice or hearing the cause of the petitioner, the respondents are attempting to take coercive action and are attempting to forcibly dispossess the petitioner from his valuable lands. 4. The petitioner further submits that be that as it may, the petitioner's agriculture crops are in mid harvest and his bore well as well as well, will be completely affected on account of the arbitrary act of the respondents. Further, if the petitioner's well is affected, irrigation to entire fields will be affected and will ruin the entire cultivation and in the result, his fertile lands will turn into desert. Under these circumstance, the coercive action by the respondents which is being carried unauthorizedly and without following the process is nothing but arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. The petitioner further submits that knocking out his entire agriculture land without even serving notice to him and without even compensating the agriculturist is nothing but illegal and arbitrary. 5. The third respondent has filed a counter statement stating that by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 164 and Section 185(2)(a) of the Electricity Act 2003, the Board shall have the powers of the Telegraphic Authority under the Telegraphic Act, 1885 (Central Act XIII of 1885) with regard to laying of the telegraphic lines and erecting poles. As such the Board, the transmission licensee, is not bound to give prior notices to the land owners before drawing overhead lines or erecting towers for transmission of electricity. As such the Board, the transmission licensee, is not bound to give prior notices to the land owners before drawing overhead lines or erecting towers for transmission of electricity. He further submits that the Scheme was approved vide B.P.No.137, dated 18.06.2007 and published in both Tamil and English in Indian Express and Dinamani dated 13.07.2011 for wide publicity and also published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 28.09.2011. He further submits that before the scheme is sanctioned by the Full Board, TANTRANSCO (TNEB) have scrutinized the data collected during the survey regarding environmental considerations, road crossing and river crossing and the inhabitants. Further, while conducting the surveys mentioned above, special cares were taken to avoid routing the transmission lines through reserve or protected forests, villages, bulk storage oil tank, oil pipeline, airports, cluster of hamlets to avoid or to minimize the damages. 6. The third respondent further submits that any notice need not be given to land owner before laying extra high tension (EHT) line on their land. The line could not be deviated due to technical feasibility, the work is carried out as per the approved route, and as per the Rules. He further submits that the TANTRANSCO (TNEB) is now facing much more problems to provide the electricity power supply to the public due to the scarcity of electric power and the demand raising day to day development activities. Considering the present scarcity of Electric Power Supply and future development activities, the TANTRANSCO (TNEB) has planned to establish the new 400 KV sub stations along with the associated lines. Out of which, one of the 400 KV EHT line of Pugalur 400 KV sub station to Kalivanthapattu 400 KV sub station is being erected by the TANTRANSCO. 7. The third respondent further submits that the new 400 KV line of Pugalur to Kalivanthapattu 400 KV sub station is very much essential to transmit the electric power from South region to Chennai and also wind power from Southern region of Tamilnadu. So, this line is very much essentially required to facilitate the uninterrupted electric power supply to the public. The third respondent further submits that the new 400 KV line of Pugalur to Kalivanthapattu 400 KV sub station is very much essential to transmit the electric power from South region to Chennai and also wind power from Southern region of Tamilnadu. So, this line is very much essentially required to facilitate the uninterrupted electric power supply to the public. He further submits that the TANTRANSCO (TNEB) has proposed to erect the EHT lines most probable in agricultural lands because the TANTRANSCO (TNEB) is not acquiring any lands but for making only use of it for laying tower foundation and drawing the line over the lands as per the Section 164 of the TN Electricity Act 2003 the exercise of power of Telegraph authority in certain cases. He further submits that the compensation has been already paid for actual damages during the execution of work according to the provision of Act for crops and tree whenever tree are required to be cut and removed from the line to have the adequate vertical and horizontal clearance for having safety of livelihood. The compensation of Rs.2,43,728/-has been received by the petitioner and his son vide cheque payment. He further submits that the agriculturist can cultivate any crops like paddy, sugarcane, turmeric, banana, high breed variety of mango trees etc, so there is no restriction for cultivation of crops. The location 640 laid in the petitioner land for crossing over the railway track, Villupuram-Katpadi at KM 45/500-600. 8. The third respondent further submits that recently there is a judgment delivered by this Court in W.P.No.18367 of 2009, dated 29.10.2009, wherein, it is clearly ordered vide para 13 as follows:- "a. No notice is necessary to the land owner before laying High Tension Line in their land. b. The permission of the land owner for laying High Tension wire over the above land of the petitioner is not necessary under Section 10 and Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. c. Such permission is required only in the case of the land owned by the local authority." 9. The third respondent further submits that as per SRly.No.T/E 31/11/164, dated 16.05.2014 advised to shift the loc. 640 to the required horizontal clearance in order to obtain the safety clearance. Hence, the Loc.640 which is available in petitioner land is shifted 11.00 m from the existing tower Loc.640 along with same corridor. The third respondent further submits that as per SRly.No.T/E 31/11/164, dated 16.05.2014 advised to shift the loc. 640 to the required horizontal clearance in order to obtain the safety clearance. Hence, the Loc.640 which is available in petitioner land is shifted 11.00 m from the existing tower Loc.640 along with same corridor. For considering the minimum damage to the petitioner land two legs was laid in the centre of the existing tower and another two legs was laid outside of the existing tower with the consent of the petitioner and also paid the additional compensation of Rs.5 lakhs in the name of the petitioner and R.4 lakhs in the name of the petitioner's son Thiru.E.Gopalasamy. The sub setting concreting of new tower loc.640 is completed on 09.06.2014. 10. The third respondent further submits that the Pugalur-Kavilvanthapattu 400 KV DC line section between Pandiankuppam to Veeramanur is laid as per the Indian Telegraph Act and Indian Electricity Act with the approved route and there is no deviation. Necessary compensation has already paid to the petitioner for shifting of the loc.640 and connected re-stringing of conductor along with the suit property. The above work was commenced on 11.06.2012 and the same is under progress. As on date about 99% works have been completed and the TANTRANSCO has invested crores of rupees 300 crores out 360 crores in this project. 11. The highly competent counsel, Mr.R.P.Vasanth appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is having an extent of 5 acres of lands and he is doing cultivation over the said lands. He depends upon his income derived from the lands for his livelihood. He is a small agricultural land owner and as the respondents have erected High voltage electricity grid over his land, he is unable to do cultivation of his land in a proper manner. Further, the activities of the respondents in erecting High voltage electricity grid on the land amounts to trespass and is an illegal act and their occupation is an unlawful one even though it is for public purpose. He further submits that the respondents are attempting to close the well which is situated in the said lands. 12. Further, the activities of the respondents in erecting High voltage electricity grid on the land amounts to trespass and is an illegal act and their occupation is an unlawful one even though it is for public purpose. He further submits that the respondents are attempting to close the well which is situated in the said lands. 12. The highly competent counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that without prior notice to the land owner and without conducting an enquiry, the respondents have forcibly acquired the petitioner's property for erecting High voltage electricity grid over the said property and this act of theirs are violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. The respondents herein are State Government concerns and they are operating their big machinery against the poor agriculturist for acquiring his land unlawfully. Further, the petitioner has raised a number of rosewood sandalwood, mango trees and teak trees, over the said lands. Hence, the very competent counsel entreats the Court to forbear the respondents, their men, agents, servants or subordinates or anybody claiming through them from in any manner interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated at Survey No.55/11, 13, 15, 17, 18, 1A, 1B, 1C, 4A, 5B, 6, 7A, 7B, 7C, 8A, 8C, 9A, 9B at Aananandhal Village, Madurampattu Post, Tiruvannamalai District. 13. The very competent Additional Advocate General Mr.P.H.Aravind Pandian, submits that the respondents had erected a High voltage electricity grid on the petitioner's land, for the welfare of the general public in large. As per the Indian Telegraphic Act, 1885 under Section 10, the respondents have ample power to enter into the immovable property for erecting High voltage electricity grid, for which, prior notice is absolutely not necessary. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, he is entitled to receive an adequate compensation from the respondents after making proper representations. Further, the erection work being undertaken in the petitioner's lands is at an incomplete stage and therefore, the respondents shall be permitted to carry out the unfinished work for the welfare of the general public, which is absolutely necessary. Hence, the highly Competent Additional Advocate General, Mr.P.H.Aravind Pandian, entreats the Court to dismiss the above writ petition as the petitioner's fundamental and personal rights had not been affected. Hence, the highly Competent Additional Advocate General, Mr.P.H.Aravind Pandian, entreats the Court to dismiss the above writ petition as the petitioner's fundamental and personal rights had not been affected. Further, the question of trespass or illegal occupation does not arise in the instant case, since the High voltage electricity grid which is being erected is to serve the public. Further, the respondents have never made any attempt to close the petitioners' well. 14. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsels on either side and on perusing the affidavit of the petitioner and on scrutiny of typed-set of papers, this Court is of the view that the property on which the High voltage electricity grid is being erected belongs to the petitioner. Further, the respondents have been erecting the High voltage electricity grid to and in the interest of the general public. However, the aggrieved petitioner is entitled to receive adequate compensation from the respondents after making necessary application, if not paid already. Hence, this Court directs the petitioner to file an application before the respondents for compensation and after receipt of the said application for compensation, the respondents shall assess the compensation after taking into consideration the damage caused to the crops and the extent of loss caused due to use of land for erection of the said High voltage electricity grid. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed further in completion of their project over the said land. 15. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.