ORDER : 1. The instant petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief(s): “(I) Pass an appropriate writ, order or direction to respondents to implement Survey2/Annexure; P7 or the respondents may be directed to conduct another survey in such a manner so the rights of the petitioners are affected. (ii) The public notice issued by the respondent HPSEBL dated 14.8.2020/Annexure P3 and survey1/Annexure; P6 be quashed and declared as null void by way of passing an appropriate writ or order or direction against the respondents and in favour of the petitioners. (iii) The orders passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner dated 14.12.2020 Annexure P9 be also set aside, quashed and declared as null and void; (iv) That in the alternative the petitioners prays that the respondents be directed to conduct Survey-3 alternative in the presence of the affected parties.” 2. At the very outset, it needs to be observed that the instant petition is an outcome of the directions passed by this Court in CWPIL No. 212 of 2017, whereby the authorities were directed to shift the High Tension Transmission line along/besides Parwanoo to Dhalli, NH5. 3. Petitioner No. 1 is running a university whereas the remaining petitioners are the residents of village Wakana. The work of National Highway-5 from solan to Kaithlighat is being undertaken by respondent No. 2 and the lands of the petitioners are adjoining this highway. The transmission towers of the HPSEBL are abutting NH-5 and the same, in terms of order passed in CWPIL No. 212 of 2017 were required to be shifted, for which purpose the HPSEBL deposited a sum of Rs. 7.01 crore excluding the land acquisition cost. These transmission lines are being shifted from Parwanoo to Shimla at the request of respondent No. 2-NHAI. 4. In this background, respondent No. 1 issued notification under Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and also published a public notice in the local newspaper on 14.8.2020 and thereafter filed a petition under Section 16(1) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, after complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, against the petitioners and the same was decided by the District Magistrate, Solan on 14.12.2020. 5. The petition was contested only by petitioner No. 1, whereas remaining petitioners did not put in appearance and were proceeded exparte. 5. The petition was contested only by petitioner No. 1, whereas remaining petitioners did not put in appearance and were proceeded exparte. In terms of the order passed by the District Magistrate, Solan, the authorities were directed to render all assistance to respondent No. 1 for shifting the transmission towers, subject to payment of compensation, in case of any damage to the property, including the property of the petitioners. 6. Respondent No. 1,thereafter obtained the necessary No Objection Certificates (NOCs) from all the concerned authorities for shifting the transmission towers and it is only thereafter that it had proposed to shift the transmission towers, which were coming in the way of four laning work of National Highway-5 from Solan to Kaithlighat. 7. It is on the directions of the District Magistrate that respondent No. 1 tried to find an alternate route for conducting a fresh survey, but the alternate route was found to be not possible, as the proposed route was found to be the best route, causing minimum inconvenience and hardship. 8. In such circumstances, the moot question is whether the petition, for the relief as prayed for, is maintainable? 9. After going through the contentions of the parties, it is pertinent to refer to Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Sections 10 and 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, which read as under: “164. Exercise of powers of Telegraph Authority in certain cases: The appropriate Government may, by order in writing, for the placing of electric lines or electrical plant for the transmission of electricity or for the purpose of telephonic or telegraphic communications necessary for the proper coordination of works, confer upon any public officer, licensee or any other person engaged in the business of supplying electricity under this Act, subject to such conditions and restriction, if any, as the Appropriate Government may think fit to impose and to the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885) any of the powers which the telegraph authority possesses under that Act with respect to the placing of telegraph lines and posts for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained, by the Government or to be so established or maintained.” 10. Power for telegraph authority to place and maintain telegraph lines and posts:The telegraph authority may, from time to time, place and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along, or across, and posts in or upon any immovable property: Provided that:- 1. The telegraph authority shall not exercise the powers conferred by this section except for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained by the [Central Government], or to be so established or maintained. 2. The [Central Government] shall not acquire any right other than that of user only in the property under, over, along, across in or upon which the telegraph authority places any telegraph line or post; and 3. Except as hereinafter provided, the telegraph authority shall not exercise those powers in respect of any property vested in or under the control or management of any local authority, without the permission of that authority; and 4. In the exercise of the powers conferred by this section, the telegraph authority shall do as little damage as possible, and, when it has exercised those powers in respect of any property other than that referred to in clause (c), shall pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers. 16. Exercise of powers conferred by section 10, and disputes as to compensation, in case of property other than that of a local authority 1. If the exercise of the powers mentioned in section 10 in respect of property referred to in clause (d) of that section is resisted or obstructed, the District Magistrate may, in his discretion, order that the telegraph authority shall be permitted to exercise them. 10. The Electricity Act 2003 came subsequent to the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. While the Electricity Act was enacted, the specific reference therein has been made to the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 in Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003, wherein it has been specifically stated that the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 will be made applicable for the purpose of implementing the government orders for placing electrical lines or electrical plants for transmission of the electricity for public interest. Reading of the said provision, makes it abundantly clear that in respect of a scheme, the mode of implementation is by following the mandates of Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Sections 10 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 provides the mechanism of compensation and the petitioners can have no grievance on that. 11. Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act clearly stipulates that the Telegraph authority may, from time to time, place and maintain a telegraph line, under, over, along, or across, and posts in or upon any immovable property. Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 gives power to enter upon and there is no restrain except complying Section 16 of the said Act. Such power under Section 10 is exercised in public interest. The intention of the legislature is very clear and there is no ambiguity in it. The exercise of power under this Act, would not amount to an acquisition, and under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, an aggrieved person is only entitled to get a compensation. 12. The State government is having jurisdiction under the Electricity Act, 2003 to order in writing the placing of the electric line or electric plant for the purpose of transmission of electricity, which are necessary for the proper coordination of the work conferred upon any other person engaged in the said work for supplying electricity as stipulated under Section 164 of the 2003 Act, authorized the concerned Collector to issue appropriate orders under Section 16(1) OF THE Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 read with Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for acquisition of right of user in respect of the private property with proper compensation and subject to certain conditions. 13. Power under Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 is absolute. In case there is resistance or obstruction in the exercise of such power, the party aggrieved can approach the District Magistrate under Section 16(1) of the Act for compensation. While enacting the Electricity Act, 2003, the legislature has taken the object behind the Indian Telegraph Act and incorporated such mandate under Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 14. In case there is resistance or obstruction in the exercise of such power, the party aggrieved can approach the District Magistrate under Section 16(1) of the Act for compensation. While enacting the Electricity Act, 2003, the legislature has taken the object behind the Indian Telegraph Act and incorporated such mandate under Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003. 14. It is noticed that in the instant case, public notice under Section 164 of the Electricity Act was issued by respondent No. 1, inviting the objections, but the petitioners failed to file such objections, as observed above. 15. That apart only the petitioner No. 1 participated in the proceedings which were conducted by the District Magistrate, Solan, under Section 16 of the Act. 16. As observed above, respondent No. 1 is having the user rights under Part-III of the Indian Telegraph Act and it is not incumbent upon it to take prior consent from the concerned landowners. In such circumstances, the aggrieved parties are only entitled to be suitably compensated. In coming to such conclusion we draw support from the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2017 (5) SCC 143 , case titled as, “Power Grid Corporation of India Limited versus Century Textiles and Industries Limited and others”, more particularly, the observations made in paragraph 21 to 28, which read as under: 21. It is not in dispute that in exercise of powers under the aforesaid provision, the Appropriate Government has conferred the powers of Telegraph Authority vide notification dated December 24, 2003 exercisable under Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 upon the Power Grid. It may also be mentioned that a Central Transmission Utility (CTU) is a deemed licensee under the second proviso to Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Power Grid is a Central Transmission Utility and is, therefore, a deemed licensee under the Electricity Act, 2003. This coupled with the fact that Power Grid is treated as Authority under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, it acquires all such powers which are vested in a Telegraph Authority under the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 including power to eliminate any obstruction in the laying down of power transmission lines. As per the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, unobstructed access to lay down telegraph and/or electricity transmission lines is an imperative in the larger public interest. As per the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, unobstructed access to lay down telegraph and/or electricity transmission lines is an imperative in the larger public interest. Electrification of villages all over the country and availability of telegraph lines are the most essential requirements for growth and development of any country, economy and the wellbeing/ progress of the citizens. The legislature has not permitted any kind of impediment/ obstruction in achieving this objective and through the scheme of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 empowering the licensee to lay telegraph lines, applied the same, as it is, for laying down the electricity transmission lines. 22. Powers of the Telegraph Authority conferred by Sections 10, 15 and 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, stand vested in and are enjoyed by the Power Grid. These provisions are reproduced below: “10. Power for telegraph authority to place and maintain telegraph lines and posts.— The telegraph authority may, from time to time, place and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along, or across, and posts in or upon, any immovable property: Provided that— (a) the telegraph authority shall not exercise the powers conferred by this section except for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained by the Central Government, or to be so established or maintained; (b) the Central Government shall not acquire any right other than that of user only in the property under, over, along, across, in or upon which the telegraph authority places any telegraph line or post; and (c) except as hereinafter provided, the telegraph authority shall not exercise those powers in respect of any property vested in or under the control or management of any local authority, without the permission of that authority; and (d) in the exercise of the powers conferred by this section, the telegraph authority shall do as little damage as possible, and, when it has exercised those powers in respect of any property other than that referred to in clause (e) shall pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers.” “15. Disputes between telegraph authority and local authority. Disputes between telegraph authority and local authority. — (1) If any dispute arises between the telegraph authority and a local authority in consequence of the local authority refusing the permission referred to in section 10, clause (c), or prescribing any condition under section 12, or in consequence of the telegraph authority omitting to comply with a requisition made under section 13, or otherwise in respect of the exercise of the powers conferred by this Act, it shall be determined by such officer as the 1[Central Government] may appoint either generally or specially in this behalf. (2) An appeal from the determination of the officer so appointed shall lie to the Central Government; and the order of the Central Government shall be final.” “16. Exercise of powers conferred by section 10, and disputes as to compensation, in case of property other than that of a local authority.— (1) If the exercise of the powers mentioned in section 10 in respect of property referred to in clause (d) of that section is resisted or obstructed, the District Magistrate may, in his discretion, order that the telegraph authority shall be permitted to exercise them. (2) If, after the making of an order under sub-section (1), any person resists the exercise of those powers, or, having control over the property, does not give all facilities for their being exercised, he shall be deemed to have committed an offence under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860). (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. (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. (4) If any dispute arises as to the persons entitled to receive compensation, or as to the proportions in which the persons interested are entitled to share in it, the telegraph authority may pay into the court of the District Judge such amount as he deems sufficient or, where all the disputing parties have in writing admitted the amount tendered to be sufficient or the amount has been determined under sub-section (3), that amount; and the District Judge, after giving notice to the parties and hearing such of them as desire to be heard, shall determine the persons entitled to receive the compensation or, as the case may be, the proportions in which the persons interested are entitled to share in it. (5) Every determination of a dispute by a District Judge under sub-section (3), or sub-section (4) shall be final: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall affect the right of any person to recover by suit the whole or any part of any compensation paid by the telegraph authority, from the person who has received the same...” 23. Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 empowers the Telegraph Authority to place and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along or across and posts in or upon any immovable property. The provision of Section 10(b) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 makes it abundantly clear that while acquiring the power to lay down telegraph lines, the Central Government does not acquire any right other than that of user in the property. Further, Section 10(d) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 obliges the Telegraph Authority to ensure that it causes as little damage as possible and that the Telegraph Authority shall also be obliged to pay full compensation to all person interested for any damage sustained by them by reason of the exercise of those powers. 24. As Power Grid is given the powers of Telegraph Authority, Rule 3(1) of the Rules, 2006 ceases to apply in the case of Power Grid by virtue of execution clause contained in sub-rule (4) of Rule 3 which reads as under: “3(4). 24. As Power Grid is given the powers of Telegraph Authority, Rule 3(1) of the Rules, 2006 ceases to apply in the case of Power Grid by virtue of execution clause contained in sub-rule (4) of Rule 3 which reads as under: “3(4). - Nothing contained in this rule shall effect the powers conferred upon any licensee under Section 164 of the Act.” 25. We, thus, have no hesitation in rejecting the argument of the writ petitioner that the impugned action of the Power Grid was contrary to the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003. 26. We also do not find that the action of the Power Grid, in the given circumstances, by not shifting the transmission lines was arbitrary. From the facts noted above, it becomes apparent that not only it was unfeasible to change the alignment as almost entire work had already been completed by the time the writ petitioner started protesting against this move, even otherwise, the Power Grid has given sufficient explanation to point out that all relevant factors/ aspects were kept in mind while laying down the impugned transmission lines. Such transmission lines had to be in straight line to the extent possible for eliminating loss of transmission. It is also explained that electricity transmission is usually laid or crossed over agricultural land where minimum extent of land gets utilised for erecting towers and where agricultural activities are not prejudiced/obstructed in any manner. The purpose is to avoid buildings, religious places, ponds etc. while laying down these transmission lines. It is only when it becomes inevitable that towers are placed on the private lines to the minimum and least extent possible. That is what was tried to achieve in the instant case. Another important factor, which needs repetition at this stage is that no blasting is permissible within 300 mts. from the 400KV line (already existing) or the tower structure. Mining of limestone can be taken up by adopting the methods other than use of explosive/blasting – without damage to the tower foundation/tower structure or the line, which can be accomplished by using jack hammer/pneumatic hammer with compressor so as to avoid any damage to the line or tower. This aspect has also been taken note of by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in the judgment dated March 11, 2008. The Division Bench did not differ with any of these findings. This aspect has also been taken note of by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in the judgment dated March 11, 2008. The Division Bench did not differ with any of these findings. Accordingly, Civil Appeal No. 10953 of 2016 preferred by the writ petitioner stands dismissed. 27. At this stage, we deal with the direction of the Division Bench regarding compensation payable to the writ petitioner, or for that matter to the State Government. In the first instance, no such claim was laid by the writ petitioner in the writ petition or by the State Government before the High Court. Furthermore, the High Court could not have given this task to the District Collector, which is contrary to the provisions of Section 16(c) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 which are extended to laying down of electricity lines. As per this provision, such an authority vests with the District Judge. 28. These are sufficient reasons to allow Civil Appeal No. 10951 of 2016 preferred by the Power Grid by setting aside those directions. Ordered accordingly. We make it clear that if the writ petitioner feels that it is entitled to any compensation, the appropriate course of action is to file a suit before the concerned District Judge for this purpose. It would also be apt to point out at this stage that the Central Government has framed guidelines dated October 15, 2015 in this behalf which inter alia provide that the issue of compensation may be resolved having regard to the mode and manner of assessment of compensation as per the said guidelines. Therefore, it would always be open to the writ petitioner to avail the remedy as per the said guidelines.” 17. As observed above, the consent of the land owners is not required to be laying down the electric lines, since no damage of permanent nature would be caused and the land can still be used for agriculture purpose or any other purpose. 18. Noticeably, even the objections filed before the District Magistrate did not point out any legal violation, other than stating that the laying of the lines could be potential threat to the students. 18. Noticeably, even the objections filed before the District Magistrate did not point out any legal violation, other than stating that the laying of the lines could be potential threat to the students. This contention is otherwise meritless, as the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 and other Acts and Rules, governing the fields clearly provide for procedure and lay down the parameters for laying down the High Tension lines and the distance to be maintained between the High Tension lines and the ground and in case there is violation of such parameters, a complete mechanism is also provided for the redressal of the same. 19. Confronted with this, learned counsel for the petitioners would still insist that once respondent No. 1 itself has undertaken the second survey, then the transmission lines could be laid down in accordance with the second survey. 20. This contention is equally without merit, as it has specifically come on record that resurvey route passes through the forest land and therefore, it is not feasible to lay down the transmission lines in accordance with the second survey. 21. In view of the reasons stated above, we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. Parties to bear their own costs.