JUDGMENT : MARLI VANKUNG, J. Heard Mr. A. Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State respondents along with Mr. NH Khera, learned counsel for respondent No. 6 i.e., the Power Grid Corporation and Mr. D. Kamduk, learned Standing counsel for Land Management Department as well as Mr. L Perne, learned Standing counsel for the Power Department in WP(AP) 32 of 2024 & WP(AP) 78 of 2024. This court finds that both the writ petitions being analogous to each other can be heard and disposed of by a common judgment. 2 . Both the writ petitions are filed for setting aside the notification/policy st dated 31 August, 2023 issued by the Commissioner, Department of Power, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, which is the “Special Ex- Gratia Relief Package towards Right of Way for 132 KV Transmission Lines passing through Reserved Forests under the Comprehensive Scheme for Strengthening of Transmission and Distribution System in Arunachal Pradesh Policy", wherein para 2(a) of the notification provided that “For the tribal population as identified in Paragraph 3 of this Policy, who are not entitled for any benefits, including compensation of specific nature, resettlement or rehabilitation benefits, an Ex- Gratia Relief Package amount equivalent to half of the rates notified vide No. PWRS/E- 2462/2013(Pt-II)/4573-89, Dated, 2nd Sept. 2019; would be payable - [Inter alia, Ex-Gratia Relief Package payment will be computed @42.5% of land value for tower base area (i.e.. area bounded by concrete as visible from outside of four legs of the towers) impacted severely due to installation of tower/pylon structure, and maximum rate of 7.5% of land value towards diminution value of land in the width of RoW corridor due to laying of transmission line (s), as would be determined by the Deputy Commissioner or any other authority, so empowered by the State Government, based on District Rate/ Circle rate/ Stamp Act Rates.” And for the payment of land compensation to the petitioners and take cognition of the pending LPC applications pending before the authorities. 3 . Mr. A. Kashyap, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the writ petitions nos. 3 . Mr. A. Kashyap, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the writ petitions nos. WP(C) No. 32(AP)/2024 and WP(C) No. 78(AP)/2024 are a challenge to the Notification dated 31.08.2023 issued by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh through its Commissioner, Department of Power, whereby the special ex-gratia relief package amount would be equivalent to half of the rates that was paid and as per the impugned notification, the payment was to be computed @42.5% of the land value for Power Based Area i.e., the area bounded by concrete is visible from outside of the powers. It is the case of the learned counsel that the impugned notification curtails the rights of the petitioners and other forest dwellers as per law, wherein all the effected parties must be provided with the opportunity of hearing and given the opportunity to produce the documents to establish their right which may include the documents of plea independent period. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are indigenous citizens of the State of Arunachal Pradesh and were issued land possession certificates as per law. That in the impugned notification, there is complete absence of mention of due relief to tribal’s affected by the project who are having crystallized rights in the affected geographical area as per the Scheduled Tribesand Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) ACT, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Forest Rights Act of 2006). The learned counsel also submitted that para 3 of the notification also provided for the identification of individuals whose Right of Way/ROW has been effected in the Reserved Forest area and provides for a board to be constituted akin to the matters constituted for land acquisition which is in contradiction to para 2 of the notification. 5. The learned counsel further submitted that the impugned notification has considered only the Electricity Act 2003 which precedes the Forest Right Act of 2006. The learned counsel submits that the Commissioner (Power), Govt. of th Arunachal Pradesh had issued a notification dated 29 August, 2019 for the rates of compensation towards damages in regard to Right of Way (ROW), stating the rates of compensation payable for transmission lines and as for ROW to the affected land owners. The learned counsel submits that the Commissioner (Power), Govt. of th Arunachal Pradesh had issued a notification dated 29 August, 2019 for the rates of compensation towards damages in regard to Right of Way (ROW), stating the rates of compensation payable for transmission lines and as for ROW to the affected land owners. This notification provides for full compensation for full damages as per section 67 & 68 of the Electricity ACT and section 10 & 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act which states that full damages have to be paid. In spite of this notification, adding of the impugned notification can be construed to provide compensation on adhoc basis by way of Ex-Gratia Relief package to persons who are “not entitled to any” benefits. The impugned notification dated 31.08.2023 states that only half and that too to those who are not entitled. The respondent company are mandated by law to pay compensation to only affected persons and not to unaffected persons who are not entitled to compensation. That the identification must be done for those persons who have rights under the Forrest Rights Act, 2006. 6 . The learned counsel also submitted that the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Collector, Pakke Kessang District had issued an Order dated 5th December, 2023, wherein the Final Joint verification-Cum- recommendation Board was constituted for payment of diminution properties under the Chairmanship of CO, Passa-Valley and Perjering. Thereafter, a Circular dated 21st December, 2023 was issued by the Circle Office Passa-Valley Pakke Kessang District, Lemmi where genuine land affected owners needed to submit documents for final identification. 7 . The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the Notification dated 31.08.2023 is a clear violation of Section 67 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and section 10 & 16 of the India Telegraph Act wherein the respondent authorities are liable to pay full compensation but in the said impugned notification, the compensation amount is arbitrarily reduced for payment of compensation to half of the amount due which is a clear violation of the prescribed law. He further submitted that on perusal of the impugned notification, the notification itself is contradictory as in paragraph 3 of the notification, there is a provision for identifying the Tribal’s akin to land acquisition procedure. He further submitted that on perusal of the impugned notification, the notification itself is contradictory as in paragraph 3 of the notification, there is a provision for identifying the Tribal’s akin to land acquisition procedure. He submitted that the present petitioners are the scheduled tribe and the authorized dwellers and therefore, they have the right to claim proper compensation for the land which has been acquired, since they are directly affected by the installation of towers or passage of over head transmission lines installed by the Power Grid Contractors. 8 . The learned counsel submits that there is no notification covering the compensation as per law to those who have a right to such compensation within the reserved forest land. The impugned notification seems to address fictional and non-existent persons having no rights and is open to misuse by the administration and political masters by creating a new group not recognized in law and by bestowing compensation to those who have no rights to any relief in law and that Para 3 of the impugned notification has also ignored the well- established procedure under the Manual for Land acquisition in Arunachal Pradesh 2022, by creating a new procedure by the state through the Department of power. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there was a th decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 18 July, 2023, wherein at para 4 of the minutes of the meeting it was held that: "4. For identification of beneficiaries and assets thereof, a Board of officers is constituted by the Concerned Deputy Commissioner in matters related of land acquisition. In respect of Row, guidelines issued by the Department of Power for Identification of beneficiaries in non-forest areas with specific requirement of identification of beneficiaries in RF areas having notifies tribal rights as per FRA or notification constituting Reserve Forest may be followed. Since the matter pertains to Reserve forest, the representative of the forest department may necessarily be made part of such boards for identification of beneficiaries.” The impugned notification dated 31.08.2023 has completely ignored the th decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 18 July, 2023, such a notification has a chance to siphon state funds and denial rights to those who have rights to be compensated in accordance with law. That the notification will take away lawful rights of those forest dwellers, who are residing in the forest and have a right to compensation. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the acquisition/compensation, the required steps to be followed is notified in notification dated 23.08.2021.The learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the petitioners are having different types of land within the Reserve Forest and this rights of the petitioners within the forest land are inheritable rights, wherein any alienation of this rights by the State are subject to disbursement of due compensation as per law. The exact status of the rights can be verified by conducting survey and through process of inviting claims and objections of rights and the process of verification has been done away with by the impugned notifications. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the decision as to the existence of claimants and the rights of the persons to have objections cannot be taken away by the respondents sitting in the office without following any due process of law. That any decision as to compensation without an opportunity of hearing is a violation of the principle of natural justice. The learned counsel submits that the work of planting poles have already become in the area and prayed that the State respondents should issue orders by way of notification to carry out proper survey and invite objections from affected public and thus prayed for setting aside of the impugned orders dated 22.06.2020 and 31.08.2023 and to pay land compensation to the petitioners as per the provisions of law provided in Electricity Act, 2003, the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. 11. It is thus submitted that the petitioners should be compensated in compliance with Section 10 & 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and Section 67 & 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003, wherein the petitioners are entitled to full compensation and that assigning 50% compensation to people without having st any right as mentioned in the impugned notification dated 31 August, 2023 is in violation of the said above sections. He submitted that since the notification and actions not done as per the prescribe law are liable to be set aside by citing the case of Banwari Lal Kanchal Vs. Bhartendu Agarwal & Ors. He submitted that since the notification and actions not done as per the prescribe law are liable to be set aside by citing the case of Banwari Lal Kanchal Vs. Bhartendu Agarwal & Ors. MANU/UP/4186/2019 , Babu Verghese & Ors. Vs. Bar Council of Kerala & Ors , reported in (1999) 3 SCC 422 , Mackinnon Mackenzie Vs. Mackinnon Employees Union , reported in (2015) 4 SCC 544 , B.N. Nagarajan & Ors. Vs. State of Mysore & Ors. , reported in AIR 1966 SC 1942 and Sant Ram Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors ., reported in AIR 1967 SC 1910 The learned counsel also submitted that let there be an exercise in the reserve forest area to identify those persons affected by the RoW so that the affected persons may be given a chance to make their claims for consideration. 12. Mr. N. Ratan, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State respondents, on the other hand submitted that the concerned 132 KV Line is running through the Unclassified State Forest (USF) area and payment has already been made to those affected as per the 2019 notification. That all the genuine land holders have already been identified and till now 67 affected persons were identified and compensation was also duly paid to the affected persons within the Unclassified forest area during the month of March, 2024. He further submitted that the present petitioners are not the genuine land holders as they are occupying the reserved forest area without any authority. He further submitted that the electric lines do not go through the reserved forest area as claimed by the petitioners. He also submitted that in terms of the said Notification, the genuine land owners in were already identified by the authority concerned and adequate compensation has already been paid to them. 13. That the said impugned notification dated 31.08.2023 is not in any way in violation of the Electricity Act, but in fact is made purely interest of those affected by the installation of the electric lines within the reserved forest. Further, as per the Electricity Act and the Indian Telegraph Act, the petitioners have no right to claim any compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 14. The learned Addl. Further, as per the Electricity Act and the Indian Telegraph Act, the petitioners have no right to claim any compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 14. The learned Addl. Advocate General also submitted that the petitioner has gone beyond his pleadings and has not made any specific pleading that the transmission lines is within their land and there is no pleading for identification of the beneficiaries under the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 nor have the petitioners established that they have LPCs issued to them within the reserved forest area. It is further submitted that it was already decided by a coordinate bench of this court that LPCs should not be issued within reserved forest area and issued LPCs were also cancelled. He also submitted that the impugned notification has mentioned persons “not entitled” because there can be no ownership of land within the Reserved Forest, but some rights could exist under the Forest Rights Act, 2006. 15. The learned Addl. Advocate General also submitted that the address of the petitioners in their writ petition goes to show that they are not the traditional forest dwellers as envisaged under section 2 ( c) of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) ACT, 2006 and cannot claim any right under the said Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) ACT, 2006. 16. Mr. NH Khera, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 6 i.e., the Power Grid Corporation has submitted that the learned counsel for the petitioner has gone beyond his pleadings and his prayers in his writ petition and that their counter affidavit is confined to only what was pleaded and prayed for in their writ petition. 17. The learned counsel for respondent no.6 submitted that in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 164 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the Ministry of Power, Government of India vide Notification dated 24.12.2003 had required Power Grid to establish transmission systems and to undertake transmission of electricity through in the State transmission system and thus, placing and maintaining of electric lines or electric plant under, over, along or across, posts in or upon any immovable property for transmission of electricity. That in pursuance of the above mentioned power, power grid in executing a project on behalf of the department of Power (DOP), Government of Arunachal Pradesh under the comprehensive scheme of strengthening transmission and distributing system in the State took steps for mitigating the power crisis in the State. The work in question is carried out under the approval and directions of the Ministry of Power, Government of India. The learned counsel submitted that section 10 (b) of the Telegraph Act has made it clear that the respondent no. 6 were not to acquire any right other than that of user only. That prior to the commencement of the construction/laying of the said transmission line, all pre-requisition to instalment and stringent Right of Way (RoW) such as land verification, damage assessment was carried out. The power grid is bound to pay surface damage, tree, crops etc. compensation and demotion of land value to the land owners. 18. The learned counsel submitted that the Ministry of Power, Government of India, on finding that the compensation to pay surface damage, tree, crops etc. compensation is not adequate and for maintaining uniformity in compensation payment to the affected land owners during the construction of transmission lines issued guidelines of rates for payment of compensation. The Government th of Arunachal Pradesh vide Notification dated 29 August, 2019 had fully adopted the guidelines and notified the certain right of payment of compensation towards damages in regard to right of Way (RoW) for transmission lines in accordance with the guidelines. The methodology adopted for notifying the rate of payment is in accordance with Section 67 & 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 r/w Section 10 & 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, which is in addition to the compensation towards normal crops and trees damage to the affected landowners. That Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act is with reference to the “owners” of the affected land. 19. That Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act is with reference to the “owners” of the affected land. 19. The learned counsel for respondent no.6 also submits that in addition to th the above mentioned Notification dated 29 August, 2019, the Government of st Arunachal Pradesh also notified the impugned Notification dated 31 August, 2023 specifically in relation to the Comprehensive Scheme for Strengthening of Transmission and Distribution Scheme in Arunachal Pradesh and thereby notifying the “Special Ex- Gratia Relief Package towards Right of Way for 132 KV Transmission Lines passing through Reserved Forests under the Comprehensive Scheme for Strengthening of Transmission and Distribution System in Arunachal Pradesh”. That this notification was notified as a goodwill measure to include those persons who are affected by the Right of Way (ROW) for the transmission line within the reserved forest area but cannot be paid th compensation as per the Notification dated 29 August, 2019, since any compensation under the Section 67 & 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 r/w Section 10 & 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 can be given to only the affected landowners. 20. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 further submitted that a st perusal of the impugned Notification dated 31 August, 2023 shows that a notification was passed for the beneficiaries in reserved forest area, but not entitled under the Electricity Act or Indian Telegraph Act, based on assessment and finalization by the committee constituted by the concerned Deputy th Commissioner. He further submitted that the Notification dated 29 August, 2019 provides for compensation of land for tower based and right of way corridor in addition to normal tree and crop compensation to the affected land owners and that no land acquisition is required for construction of power transmission lines as per law. 21. The learned counsel also submits that as per Section 16(3)(4) & (5) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the competent authority is the District Judge who has to be approach if any dispute arises with regards to compensation paid to the applicants. 22. The learned counsel further submitted that in the present case, the petitioners, being the unauthorized occupant of the reserved forest since no LPCs can be issued within the reserved forest area are not entitled to any compensation under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 or the Electricity Act. 22. The learned counsel further submitted that in the present case, the petitioners, being the unauthorized occupant of the reserved forest since no LPCs can be issued within the reserved forest area are not entitled to any compensation under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 or the Electricity Act. The Government of Arunachal Pradesh as a gesture of goodwill notified the Notification dated 31.08.2023 and has notified to pay Special Ex- Gratia Relief Package towards Right of Way for 132 KV Transmission Lines passing through Reserved Forests under the Comprehensive Scheme for Strengthening of Transmission and Distribution System in Arunachal Pradesh only for the purpose of facilitating the completion of the State-wide project for socio- economic developmentof the State of Arunachal Pradesh and thus, as per the said notification, the Special Ex- Gratia Relief Package payment has been computed at the rate of 42.5% of the land value for tower based area and 7.5% of the land value towards demolition value of the land in the width of RoW corridor due to laying of transmission lines as would be determined by the Deputy Commissioner or any other authority so empowered by the State Government, based on District rate/Circle rate/Stamp rate. The learned counsel therefore submits that there were no grounds for st setting aside the impugned Order dated 31 August 2023 and that the instant petitions while praying for quashing the notification cannot also claim for the identification or verification of any right under the notification . 23. Mr. A. Kashyap, the learned counsel for the petitioners in rebuttal had submitted that he does not dispute the compensation given to the affected persons within the Unclassified State Forest (USF) area and that his instant writ petition is confined only to the land owners within the reserved forest area whose rights under the Forest Reserve Act 2006 have not been considered. 24. I have considered the submissions made by the rival parties and have also perused the documents on record. 25. This court finds that the writ petitions are filed for an appropriate writ or order on the following points :- i) for setting aside and quashing the notice dated 22.06.2020/ 31.08.2023 issued by the respondent no.3, ii). 24. I have considered the submissions made by the rival parties and have also perused the documents on record. 25. This court finds that the writ petitions are filed for an appropriate writ or order on the following points :- i) for setting aside and quashing the notice dated 22.06.2020/ 31.08.2023 issued by the respondent no.3, ii). For directing there respondent authorities to the pay land compensation as per the provisions of the laws including: Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013; Electricity Act, 2003; Indian Telegraph Act 1885, Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006, iii) to take cognizance of LPC applications pending with the state administration and invite claims and objections in pursuance of laws related to acquisition of land and compute applicable compensation to rightful tribal citizens in affected areas or any other relief or reliefs under the law. 26. It is seen that the respondent no.6/POWERGRID has taken steps for the construction 132 KV S/C Rilloh to Seijosa transmission line falling in Pakke- Kessang District, under comprehensive scheme for strengthening of transmission and distribution system in Arunachal Pradesh for which purpose the respondents no.6 POWERGRID has been authorized to exercise all the powers vested in the Telegraph Authority under Part III of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, under Section 164 of The Electricity Act, 2003. 27. A reading of section 10(b) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 clarifies that that when the telegraph authority places a telegraph line on any property, the Central Government/POWERGRID will only acquire a right of usage over that property, not ownership rights over it; essentially meaning they can use the land for their telegraph lines but cannot claim ownership of the property itself. Section 10(d) of the Act provides that the telegraph authority shall do as little damage as possible, and, when it has exercised those powers in respect of any property, shall pay full compensation to all persons interested for any damage sustained by them. Thus, it is seen that a person cannot claim for land compensation on the construction 132 KV transmissions line or for ROW within the unclassified forest area or within the reserved forest area as per the provisions of the laws, but can only claim compensation for surface damage to trees, crops etc over their landed property. 28. Thus, it is seen that a person cannot claim for land compensation on the construction 132 KV transmissions line or for ROW within the unclassified forest area or within the reserved forest area as per the provisions of the laws, but can only claim compensation for surface damage to trees, crops etc over their landed property. 28. It is also seen that the State of Arunachal Pradesh had notified a notification dated 29.08.2019 & 02.09.2019, notifying fixed rates of compensation to the affected land owners in addition to the compensation for the damages under Section 10(d) of the Indian Telegraph Act. The petitioners do not challenge the notification wherein that the affected persons who have sustained damages for the 132 KV line running through the Unclassified State Forest/USF area have been duly identified and been given full compensation for damages as per the prescribed rates in consonance with the Electricity Act and the Indian Telegraph Act. 29. The petitioners have questioned he sustainability of para 2(a) of the impugned Notification dated 31.08.2023 which refers to the Tribal population within the Reserved Forest area who are considered ‘not entitled any benefits’ and are to be given only half the rates prescribed in the notification dated 02.09.2019. 30. The Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh had notified the impugned notification/policy titled "Special EX-Gratia Relief Package towards Rights of Way for 132 Kilovolt Transmission Lines is passing through the Reserved Forest under the Comprehensive Scheme for Strengthening of Transmission and Distribution Systems in Arunachal Pradesh” dated 31.08.2023, wherein Para 2 (a) of the said impugned notification is reproduced below:- “2. Right of way for 132 kV Transmission Lines: (a) For the tribal population as identified in Paragraph 3 of this Policy, who are not entitled for any benefits, including compensation of specific nature, resettlement or rehabilitation benefits, an Ex-Gratia Relief Package amount equivalent to half of the rates notified vide No. PWRS/E- 2462/2013(Pt- II)/4573-89, Dated, 2nd Sept. Right of way for 132 kV Transmission Lines: (a) For the tribal population as identified in Paragraph 3 of this Policy, who are not entitled for any benefits, including compensation of specific nature, resettlement or rehabilitation benefits, an Ex-Gratia Relief Package amount equivalent to half of the rates notified vide No. PWRS/E- 2462/2013(Pt- II)/4573-89, Dated, 2nd Sept. 2019: would be payable - [Inter alia, Ex-Gratia Relief Package payment will be computed @42.5% of land value for tower base area (ie., area bounded by concrete as visible from outside of four legs of the towers) impacted severely due to installation of tower/pylon structure, and maximum rate of 7.5% of land value towards diminution value of land in the width of RoWcorridor due to laying of transmission line(s), as would be determined by the Deputy Commissioner or any other authority, so empowered by the State Government, based on District Rate/ Circle rate/ Stamp Act Rates.] Para 3 : For identification of the affected individual(s) where RoWs have been duly granted by the Competent authority in Reserve Forest area, a Board of Officers shall be constituted by the Deputy Commissioner(s) concerned at the District level, akin to the Board constituted in matters related to Land acquisition. The representative of the Forest Department shall be necessarily included in the such Boards for identification of person(s)." 31. It is noted that the impugned notification has a reference to the notification Dated, 2nd Sept. 2019 vide No. PWRS/E- 2462/2013(Pt-II)/4573- 89, 2019. On perusal of this notification, it is seen that the state of Arunachal Pradesh has adopted the rates of payment of compensation towards damages in regard to Right of Way (RoW) for the transmission lines, in accordance with the Guidelines of the Ministry of Power, Govt. of India, vide Ref. No. 03/07/2015- Trans, dtd. 18.10.2015, for maintaining uniformity in compensation payment to the affected land owners during construction of transmission lines. These guidelines of payment methodology of compensation towards "damages" as stipulated in Section 67 & 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Section 10 and 16 of Indian Telegraph Act 1885 shall be in addition to the compensation towards normal crop and tree damages. (i) Compensation @ 85 % of land value as determined by District Magistrate or any other competent authority based on Govt. (i) Compensation @ 85 % of land value as determined by District Magistrate or any other competent authority based on Govt. approved rates, Circle rate/ Guidelines value/Stamp Act rates for tower base area (between four legs at ground level) impacted severely due to installation of lower/pylon structure. (ii) Compensation towards diminution of land value in the width of Right of Way (RoW) Corridor due to laying of transmission line and imposing certain restriction at a maximum rate of 15% of land value as determined by Deputy Commissioner or any other competent authority based on Circle rate/Guidelines value / stamp At rates. 32. From the reading of the above notification it is seen that the rates of compensation calculated as stipulated under the Section 67 & 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 r/w Section 10 & 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 can be given to only the affected land owners . Thus, it can be understood that impugned notification dated 31.08.2023 has addressed those Tribal population within the Reserved Forest area who are considered ‘not entitled any benefits’ for not being the ‘land owners’, but who have certain rights under section 3 of The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. 33. The forest rights of forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers on all forest lands, under section 3 of the act includes (i) right to hold and live in the forest land under the individual or common occupation for habitation or for self-cultivation for livelihood by a member or members of a forest dwelling Scheduled Tribe or other traditional forest dwellers; (ii) community rights right of ownership, access to collect, use, and dispose of minor forest produce which has been traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries; (iii) other community rights of uses or entitlements such as fish and other products of water bodies, grazing etc. Thus if these rights have been affected by Transmission Lines passing through Reserved Forests, even if they are “not entitled” under the notification dated 02.09.2019 para 2 (a) of the impugned notification has taken care of them, wherein, they are said to be entitled half the rates guidelines of payment methodology of compensation towards "damages" as stipulated in Section 67 & 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Section 10 and 16 of Indian Telegraph Act 1885, though they may not be the “land owners”. Thereafter Para 3 of the impugned notification refers to the identification of such persons entitled under para 2(a) of the impugned notification dated 31.08.2023. 34. Thus, this court finds that the Notification dated 31.08.2023 issued by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh could be appropriately termed as a gesture of goodwill to pay Special Ex- Gratia Relief Package towards Right of Way for 132 KV Transmission Lines passing through Reserved Forests, wherein the payment has been computed at the rate of 42.5% of the land value for tower based area and 7.5% of the land value towards demolition value of the land in the width of RoW corridor due to laying of transmission lines which would be determined by the Deputy Commissioner or any other authority so empowered by the State Government, based on District rate/Circle rate/Stamp rate, to those persons not entitled under the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, but have certain rights under the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, within the Reserved Forest area. For the above reason, this court finds that there are no grounds for setting st aside the impugned Order dated 31 August, 2023. 35. This court also finds that the petitioners in the instant writ petitioners have not established that they have valid LPCs within the reserved forest area which is made clear from the nature of their prayer in their writ petitioner wherein, the prayer is to “take cognizance of LPC applications pending with the state administration” and therefore their claims for consideration of any compensation cannot be considered at this stage. This court however observes that in the interest of justice, the concerned respondent authorities should dispose of any such pending applications expeditiously. 36. This court however observes that in the interest of justice, the concerned respondent authorities should dispose of any such pending applications expeditiously. 36. Accordingly in view of the above findings, both the writ petitions WP(C) 32(AP) of 2024 and WP(C) 78(AP) of 2024 are dismissed and stand disposed of.