Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
R.D. Dhanuka, M.M. Sathaye, JJ.
Sangeeta Natwarlal Karwa - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 5327 of 2022
Decided On : 28-02-2023
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT - LAND ACQUISITION - Sections 3(G)(1), 3(G)(5) - The court discussed the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956, particularly Sections 3(G)(1) and 3(G)(5), which outline the process for determining compensation for land acquisition. The court emphasized that the Competent Authority lacks the power to issue a supplementary award that alters the original compensation amount once it has been determined. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation that the National Highways Act is a self-contained code, and any modifications to the award must follow the established legal framework.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioners, owners of land in Solapur, challenged a Modified Supplementary Award that reduced their compensation for land acquisition under the National Highways Act, 1956. The original award had determined compensation for their land, but a new authority issued a supplementary award without legal authority, reducing the compensation amount.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the issuance of the supplementary award was without jurisdiction as the Competent Authority did not have the power to alter the original award. The court noted that the National Highways Act provides a complete mechanism for compensation determination and does not allow for subsequent modifications by the Competent Authority.
Issues: Whether the Competent Authority had the jurisdiction to issue a supplementary award that reduced the compensation amount determined in the original award under the National Highways Act, 1956.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that once an award is made under the National Highways Act, the Competent Authority loses the authority to modify or issue supplementary awards. The provisions of the National Highways Act are self-contained and do not permit alterations to the compensation once determined.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was allowed, quashing the supplementary award and directing the release of the original compensation amount to the Petitioners within a specified timeframe.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
R.D.DHANUKA, J. - Rule. Mr.Gokhale waives service for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr.Athani waives service for the Respondent No.4. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, the Petition is heard finally.
2. By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the impugned Modified Supplementary Award dtd. 25/3/2021 passed by the Competent Authority, Deputy Collector Land Acquisition No.1, Solapur and also pray for quashing and setting aside the impugned notice dtd. 22/9/2021 issued under Sec. 3(G)(1)(2) and 3 (H) (2) (3) and 3(E)(1) (2) by the Deputy Collector Land Acquisition No.1, Solapur.
3. The Petitioners also prayed for a declaration and direction against the Competent Authority to restore and confirm the Award dtd. 25/3/2021 under Sec. 3(G) of the National Highways Act, 1956 and also to restore and confirm the notice dtd. 26/7/2021, issued by the Deputy Collector Land Acquisition No.1, Solapur.
4. The Petitioners also prayed for a writ of mandamus against the Respondent No.4 to deposit the deficit award amount of Rs.18, 89, 519.00 for acquisition of the Petitioners' area admeasuring 800 sq. mtrs. of Gat No.37/1/1, situated at Village Valsang, Taluka South Solapur, District Solapur. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this Petition are as under :
5. The Petitioners are the owners of the land admeasuring 4 acres of Gat No.37/1/2 situated at Valsang, Taluka South Solapur, District Solapur.
6. The Executive Engineer, National Highways Authority, Solapur submitted a proposal on 30/3/2016 to the District Collector, Solapur for acquisition of the land admeasuring 67.67 k.m. for extension for four lane highway in between Solapur to Gulbarga, National Highway No.150. The District Collector thereafter appointed the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No.1 as a Competent Authority for acquisition proceedings.
7. On 25/3/2021, the Respondent No.3 declared an award under Sec. 3(G)(1) of the National Highways Act and determined compensation of Rs.1, 49, 04, 561.00 for acquisition of additional area admeasuring 2360 sq. mtrs. Insofar as the Petitioners area admeasuring 800 sq, mtrs. is concerned, the Competent Authority determined the compensation at the rate of Rs.1, 520.00 per sq. mtrs. and determined the compensation and fixed the compensation of Rs.49, 39, 164.00. Neither the Petitioners nor the National Highway Authority challenged the said award by invoking Sec. 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.
8. The Respondent No.3 however, issued a notice on 6/8/2021 calling upon the Petitioners to remain present for receipt of compensation amount. In the month of August / September, 2021, the Respondent No.3 - Nagesh Patil took charge and declared Modified Supplementary Award dtd. 25/3/2021. On 22/9/2021, the said Nagesh Patil decreased the Petitioners' compensation amount from Rs.49, 39, 164.00 to Rs.30, 49, 645.00 without following due process of law.
9. The Petitioners called for the information under Right to Information Act on 24/9/2021, when the Petitioners were informed that the Authority did not have any information as called upon the provisions of the Right to Information Act.
10. The Petitioners thus filed this Petition for various reliefs.
11. Mr.Patil, learned counsel for the Petitioners invited our attention to the original award, notice issued by the Respondent No.3, who took charge only for a period of one month and the supplementary award and submitted that the original award having been made determining the compensation in the sum of Rs.49, 39, 164.00 for acquisition of the Petitioners' private land admeasuring 800 sq. mtrs., the Respondent No.3 could not have made any such supplementary award. He submitted that there is no such power prescribed under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 in the Competent Authority to issue supplementary award. He submitted that t
The Competent Authority under the National Highways Act, 1956, does not possess the power to issue supplementary awards that alter previously determined compensation amounts.
Competent Authority under National Highways Act becomes functus officio after passing award under Section 3G(1) and lacks jurisdiction to issue corrigendum or modified award for same land.
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to alter or review awarded compensation once finalized, except in limited circumstances defined by statute.
The District Collector exceeded jurisdiction by directing redetermination of compensation under the National Highways Act, as awards were already made prior to the 2013 Act's applicability.
The court established that compliance with procedural requirements of the National Highways Act is essential for valid land acquisition, particularly regarding timely compensation to affected parties....
The judgment establishes that compliance with procedural requirements in land acquisition is essential, and failure to notify affected parties or timely deposit of compensation invalidates the acquis....
The procedure under Sections 3G and 3E of the National Highways Act was duly followed in passing the awards.
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
