IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Subba Reddy Satti, J.
Mantena Anjaneya Raju - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 39081 of 2018
Decided On : 14-09-2023
NH Act - Land Acquisition - Sec. 3-A, Sec. 3D - 3-A, 3D - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the legality of the notification issued under Sec. 3-A and Sec. 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956 for the formation of NH-165 from Pamarru to Diga Marru Road. The court found that the notification under Sec. 3A(1) and Declaration under Sec. 3D of the Act, challenged in the writ petition, are liable to be set aside, in respect of Option 10C, Bhimavaram bypass, since the notification was published even before the satisfaction, sine qua non, for publishing the notification.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the legality of the notification issued under Sec. 3-A and Sec. 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956 for the formation of NH-165 from Pamarru to Diga Marru Road. The petitioners submitted objections and representations, contending that the alignment was changed without considering their objections. The court granted interim order observing that the present acquisition was not required and the balance of convenience was in favor of the petitioners.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the notification under Sec. 3A(1) and Declaration under Sec. 3D of the Act, challenged in the writ petition, are liable to be set aside, in respect of Option 10C, Bhimavaram bypass, since the notification was published even before the satisfaction, sine qua non, for publishing the notification.
Issues: The issues considered by the court were: (1) Whether the notification issued under Sec. 3(A) of the N.H.Act in respect of Bhimavaram bypass i.e., option 10C, is after the approval of MoRTH? If not, the notification to the extent of option 10C is liable to set aside. (2) Whether the objections of the petitioners were properly considered and the orders are communicated? If not, the notification in respect of petitioners' land is liable to be set aside?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the notification under Sec. 3A(1) and Declaration under Sec. 3D of the Act, challenged in the writ petition, are liable to be set aside, in respect of Option 10C, Bhimavaram bypass, since the notification was published even before the satisfaction, sine qua non, for publishing the notification.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated supra. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in issuing the notification, dtd. 10/11/2017 published in the Gazette of India, for the purpose of formation of NH-165 from pamarru to Diga Marru Road i.e. 61/740 to 107/660 under Sec. 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short 'the NH Act') and also the Gazette of India notification dtd. 6/11/2018 issued under Sec. 3D of the NH Act as illegal, arbitrary and violation of fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
2. The averments, in brief, are that notification, dtd. 10/11/2017 issued under Sec. 3-A of the NH Act was published in Gazette of India, proposing to acquire land for formation of NA-165 from Pamarru to Digamarru Road i.e., 61/740 to 107/600 in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The lands of some of the petitioners as well as the lands of M/s. Vijaya Lakshmi Anjaneya Ice Factory and M/s UPVC doors, where petitioner Nos.6 to 15 and 16 to 23 are working, were also notified. Petitioners submitted their objections on 29/11/2017 and, also made representations dtd. 30/12/2017 to the Minister of Road Transport and Highways (for short 'MoRTH') to adopt either the master plan or by-pass road for the purpose of National Highway to the extent of Bhimavaram. However, the authorities, without considering the objections and representations, issued gazette notification dtd. 6/11/2018 under Sec. 3D of the NH Act. Aggrieved by the said action, the above writ petition is filed.
3. This Court granted interim order on 27/11/2018 observing that the letter of the Chief Engineer, if taken forward, the present acquisition, is not required and balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioners.
4. a) Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondent No.6. It was contended, inter alia, about issuance of notice under Sec. 3(A) of the NH Act proposing to acquire lands in Bhimavaram, Akivudu, Undi and Kalla Mandals, for formation of NH 165 in the stretch of land from km.61/740 to 107/660 in the State of Andhra Pradesh. In the notification it was mentioned that objections, if any, have to be submitted within 21 days from the date of publication of the notification in the gazette. After completion of statutory period, public hearing was conducted on 21/12/2017 by the competent authority. The issues raised at the time of the public hearing were referred to the Regional Officer, MoRTH, Vijayawada. After receiving remarks from Executive Engineer (R and B), NH Division, Visakhapatnam, the then competent authority for LA and Additional Joint Collector, NH-165, West Godavari, Eluru issued orders disposing of the objections. The master plan was proposed in the year, 1987 and no land acquisition was done so far. Land plan schedules were furnished to competent authority for formation of NH 165. Many existing houses and habitations are eliminated while proposing the alignment and the MoRTH, New Delhi approved the alignment. Therefore, it is not possible to change the alignment at this stage. The alignment is finalized and submitted for approval, for Bhimavaram Bypass covering Bhimavaram Town, Srungavruksham (V) and Veeravasaram (V). It was reviewed during joint site visit with A.K. Nagapal, Additional Director General, MoRTH, New Delhi on 26/5/2018 and agreed for the alignment option 10 C vide Lr.No.NH 165/61.000 to 107.600/CE(NH)/EE(NH)/DEE2/ AEE 2/2016, dtd. 27/6/2018 of the Engineer-in-Chief (R and B), NH and CRF, Vijayawada.
b) The alignment of 10A i.e. mini bypass is surrounded by dense habitation and the approved alignment i.e. 10C is located away from dense habitation. The DPR consultant M/s. Infinite Civil Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad proposed Bhimavaram - Veeravasaram Bypass alignment for the villages Vissakoderu, Goraganamudi, Pennada Agraharam, Srungavruksham and Veeravasaram in consultation with Department and adopting the standards and specification as per IRC SP: 73-2012 and approved the optio
AI
The court affirmed the validity of land acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act, emphasizing the expertise of the highway authority and limited scope for judicial review in technical ....
Absence of any reference to a plan in the Notification and infact non-availability of any plan linked to the notification, fortifies argument that the description of the land under acquisition in the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of complying with the specified time frame for filing objections under the National Highways Act and the court's emphasis on the pub....
Acquisition of Land -Petitioner, being a person interested in the land acquired, is not precluded from raising his claim before the competent authority on issuance of the notification under Section 3....
Point of law: Land Acquisition - Where in respect of any land, a notification has been published under sub-section (1) of section 3A for its acquisition but no declaration under sub-section (1) has b....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.