The Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (UPERC) has dismissed a revision petition concerning compensation for land used for a transmission tower, ruling that disputes over land ownership and title must be decided by civil courts.
The case relates to the construction of the 400 kV NTPC (Tanda)-Basti transmission line by Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited (UPPTCL). A transmission tower was erected on Gata No. 99 in Khairpur village, Ambedkar Nagar district. The petitioners claimed ownership of the land based on civil court decrees issued in 1946 and 1990 and sought compensation at the prevailing circle rate along with interest.
Following directions from the High Court, the District Magistrate of Ambedkar Nagar examined the compensation claim and issued an order on November 5, 2024. The District Magistrate declined to release the compensation, noting that revenue records classified the disputed land as public settlement/abadi land rather than recording it in the names of the claimants.
The authorities also noted that several legal proceedings concerning ownership of the land remained pending before civil courts. These included recall and restoration applications related to the 1990 ex-parte decree.
The petitioners challenged the District Magistrate’s decision before UPERC under the Works of Licensees Rules, 2006. They argued that the revenue authorities had failed to update the land records despite the civil court judgments. They also contended that the pending recall applications did not stay the operation of the decree and should not prevent payment of compensation.
UPPTCL clarified that it did not dispute its liability to pay compensation for the transmission tower constructed on Gata No. 99. However, the corporation stated that the payment had been withheld because ownership of the land had not been conclusively established by the competent authority.
A UPERC bench comprising Chairman Arvind Kumar, Member Sanjay Kumar Singh and Member (Law) Griesh Kumar Vaish examined the submissions. The Commission held that although it has jurisdiction to decide compensation disputes arising from works undertaken by electricity licensees, it cannot adjudicate questions relating to land title, ownership or revenue records.
The Commission observed that proceedings concerning ownership of the disputed land were still pending before civil courts. It therefore found the District Magistrate’s decision to withhold compensation at this stage to be justified.
UPERC rejected the revision petition and held that compensation could be considered only after ownership of the land is conclusively determined by the competent civil court.
Discover more from SolarQuarter
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
