Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Ninala Jayasurya, J.
Kondareddi Nagamani, W/o.Late Satyaranayana and others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (L&A) and others – Respondents
Writ Petition No.9816 OF 2020
Decided On : 30-04-2021
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 - Sections 24, 25 and 26 - National Highways Act, 1956 - Section 3A – Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Acquisition of land – Claim of compensation - Exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction - Whether Notification under Section 3A of N.H. Act ceases to have any effect as Section 3D Declaration was not issued within one year from date of said Notification - Whether Award was lapsed by virtue of application of Section 25 of Act 30 of 2013 to acquisition proceedings under N.H. Act - Whether Award is null and void due to noncompliance with provisions of N.H. Act and on ground that proceedings were conducted behind back of petitioners - Petitioners are absolute owners and possessors of agricultural and non-agricultural lands in different survey numbers in Village West Godavari District - They are cultivating said lands and are in enjoyment of same - Lands of petitioners are situated abutting to National Highway and very valuable potential agricultural lands - There was a proposal to acquire lands from petitioners for construction of Toll Gate and they made representations to 3rd respondent not to acquire lands as it is their only source for cultivation – Thereafter respondents have not proceeded with acquisition and petitioners thought that acquisition proceedings have been stopped - However some people came to petitioners lands along with crane and men and tried to mark land by excavating earth - With great difficulty petitioners resisted them and rushed to 3rd respondent –
Finding of the Court: In view of specific statutory provisions under Act 30 of 2013 and Notification issued by Central Government in exercise of same conferring benefit only to extent of determination of compensation in accordance with First Second and Third Schedules of Act 30 of 2013 even in respect of cases of acquisition of land under enactments listed in Fourth Schedule to said Act question of lapsing of Award by application of Section 25 of Act 30 of 2013 does not arise at all – Therefore contentions of petitioners in this regard merits no consideration and are hereby rejected - One of submissions attempted by learned counsel for petitioners is that Award is liable to be set aside on ground of non-compliance with statutory provisions of N.H. Act – Further proceedings were conducted behind back of petitioners - As observed earlier except a pleading to effect that they came to know about proceedings initiated under N.H. Act on obtaining a copy of Award there was no denial by petitioners about issuance of Notification under Section 3A in accordance with statutory provisions of N.H. Act nor challenge to consequential Declaration under Section 3D on ground that no opportunity was afforded to file objections under Section 3C of N.H. Act - Therefore it cannot be treated as a case of denial of opportunity or deprivation of right to file objections/hearing under Section 3C of N.H. Act - It was also pleaded that Award was passed without giving opportunity to petitioners under Section 3G and that same is unsustainable – Accordingly interim order shall stand vacated - There is no statutory violation/non-compliance with provisions of N.H. Act nor Award is hit by application of Section 25 of Act 30 of 2013 - This Court finds no circumstances warranting exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India –
Result: Writ petition is dismissed
ORDER:
The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in passing Award No.2/2019/Ungutur/Toll/N.H.16, dated 15.6.2019 basing on the Notification published vide S.O.No.717E, dated 15.3.2013 as barred by limitation, illegal, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to Sections 24, 25 and 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as, Act 30 of 2013) and for a consequential direction to set aside the same and pass such other orders as may be just and necessary.
2. The brief facts set out in the affidavit of the petitioners giving rise to the present writ petition for better appreciation of their case may be narrated:
The petitioners are absolute owners and possessors of agricultural and non-agricultural lands in different survey numbers in Unguturu Village, West Godavari District. They are cultivating the said lands and are in enjoyment of the same. The lands of the petitioners are situated abutting to National Highway No.16 (old No.5) and very valuable potential agricultural lands. There was a proposal to acquire the lands from the petitioners in the year 2018 for construction of Toll Gate and they made representations to the 3rd respondent not to acquire the lands as it is their only source for cultivation. Thereafter, the respondents have not proceeded with the acquisition and the petitioners thought that the acquisition proceedings have been stopped. However, on 06.6.2019 (sic 06.6.2020) some people came to the petitioners’ lands along with crane and men, and tried to mark the land by excavating the earth. With great difficulty the petitioners resisted them and rushed to the 3rd respondent. To the petitioners’ utter surprise, the 3rd respondent and their officers informed the petitioners that their land has been acquired twice and Awards have been passed on 15.6.2019 and 26.6.2019 vide Award Nos.2 of 2019 and 4 of 2019 respectively. With great difficulty, the petitioners obtained copies of the Awards and from the said awards it emerged that the respondents proposed to acquire the land for the purpose of road widening of N.H.16 from four lane to six lane from K.M. 979.130 to 1022.494 from Gundugolanu to Rajamahendravaram, a Notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as, N.H. Act) was issued on 15.3.2013 informing that the petitioners’ land was included in the proposed acquisition for the road widening of N.H.16. A paper publication was given on 14.3.2013 and market value was determined as per Section 26 of Act 30 of 2013 based on the sales statistics preceding three years from the date of Section 3A Notification i.e., from 15.3.2010 to 15.3.2013.
3. As seen from the Awards, Section 3A Notification was issued in the year 2013 in Unguturu Mandal for 10,076 Sq.Mtrs and for further extent another publication has been issued in the year 2018 for 11,292 Sq.Mtrs. The petitioners have no knowledge about acquisition of their land and passing of Award until 06.6.2020. The respondents completely ignored the procedure contemplated under the Act of serving notice, giving opportunity of hearing and calling for objections. The entire proceedings have been conducted behind the back of the petitioners.
4. Heard Smt.Jyothi Eswar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Mr.Alisetty Lakshminarayana, learned Standing Counsel for National Highways Authority of India (N.H.A.I), for respondent Nos.3 and 4.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the averments made in the affidavit inter alia submits that as seen from the Award, Section 3A Notification under N.H. Act issued on 29.3.2012, paper publication under Section 3A(3) of the said Act was made on 15.3.2013 and Declaration un
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
