IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
D.K. SINGH, TARA VITASTA GANJU, JJ.
Project Director, National Highways Authority Of India and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Smt. Jyoti, W/o. Srinivas Reddy – Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 1041 of 2025 (LA-RES)
Decided On : 16-12-2025
JUDGMENT :
D.K. SINGH, J.
1. The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellants-National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), who were the respondents in W.P.No.12631/2022, wherein the impugned judgment and order dated 24.01.2025 came to be passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition filed by the petitioner-Smt. Jyoti.
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition, for the sake of convenience.
3. The petitioner has filed the said writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus to the respondent No.4-Special Land Acquisition Officer, NHAI, to pay compensation towards acquisition of the land of the petitioner admeasuring 606 sq.mts. in Survey No.92/7A (Khata No.804) as per the award proceedings dated 06.09.2018.
4. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the land admeasuring 1 acre and 7 guntas in Survey No.92/7A (Khata No.804) situated at Guddadarangavvanahalli Village of Chitradurga Taluk on National Highway No.50. Out of the total extent of land admeasuring 1 acre and 7 guntas, 606 sq.mts. of land is said to have been acquired by the NHAI for the purpose of extension of the National Highway in terms of the Preliminary Notification dated 17.11.2016 and the Final Notification dated 02.12.2017 published under Section 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NH Act'). The case of the petitioner before the learned Single Judge was that the said extent of 606 sq.mts. of land had been converted for non-agricultural/commercial purposes. An award was passed under Section 3G of the NH Act on 06.09.2018 determining the compensation payable in a sum of Rs.45,19,351/- for the total extent of land measuring 2272 sq.mts. in Survey No.92/7A and the said compensation amount was ordered to be paid to the other land owners. However, no compensation was assessed for the petitioner's land admeasuring 606 sq.mts in Survey No.92/7A.
5. In the said award proceedings at Column No.8, it is mentioned that the total extent of land acquired under Section 3D notification is 35567 sq.mts. However, the award in respect of the land belonging to the petitioner to an extent of 606 sq.mts. has not been passed on the premise that the Land Acquisition Officer required some more information in respect of the land in question.
6. The petitioner, under such circumstances, issued a notice on 15.11.2021 to the respondent No.4-Special Land Acquisition Officer requesting either to remove the illegal encroachment or to grant the compensation. A reply dated 22.02.2022 was issued stating that the land measuring 606 sq.mts. belonging to the petitioner had not been utilized and as such, the compensation would not be payable.
7. The learned Single Judge, having placed reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in WPC No.2285/2018 and taking note of the provisions contained under Section 48 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 as well as Section 93 of the RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT , 2013, has allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent-authorities to pay compensation to the petitioner in respect of the land measuring 606 sq.mts forming part of the land in Survey No.92/7A as per the award dated 06.09.2018 along with all statutory benefits payable in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants-NHAI submitted that no compensation was assessed in respect of the petitioner-owner's land as it was not required for the purpose of widening of National Highway No.50 for which the preliminary and final notifications were issued. It is submitted that the possession of the petitioner's land was never taken and her land was mistakenly notified for acquisition. It is the petitioner who has been conveniently utilising the notified land for her personal and commercial use. It is submitted that the power to issue notification for ac
Mistaken inclusion of land in acquisition notifications does not automatically grant ownership, and compensation requires assessed possession under relevant laws.
(1) Power to issue Notification would include a power to rescind Notification.(2) Proceeding under Section 48(1) of Land Acquisition Act is administrative in nature.(3) An order secured by fraud and ....
The court emphasized the importance of providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and considering all contentions and documents in accordance with law.
Acquisition of land under Section 3-D of the National Highways Act extinguishes the owner's rights upon notification, and related lease agreements become void.
Once land is acquired and vests in the state, compensation obligations persist and cannot be negated by later claims of non-utilization.
Section 94 of 2013 Land Acquisition Act inapplicable to Highways Act acquisitions; only specified schedules for compensation, R&R apply. Belated claims post-award cannot halt projects, but affected u....
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.