The court affirmed the right to fair compensation under the National Highways Act, mandating timely acquisition processes and recognizing the constitutional right to property.

PC:-

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Rule. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

3. The petitioner's main contention is that at the time of acquisition in 2018, the petitioner's land measuring 550 sq.mtr was physically acquired, but the petitioner was paid compensation only for 50 sq.mtr.

4. Normally, such matters involve disputed questions of fact, and therefore, we are reluctant to entertain such petitions. However, in this case, we find that there is unimpeachable material to sustain the petitioner's contentions. Besides, we must note at the very outset that Ms. Swati Thavil the Deputy Collector (Acquisition) and Mr. Yashwant Patil, Competent authorised representative of NHAI have filed affidavits in which they have fairly presented the entire situation before us. We must record our appreciation at the affidavit filed by these two officers making complete disclosures and rendering full assistance of this Court to decide the matter following law.

5. These affidavits, in terms, accept the petitioner’s case about additional land of 500 sq.mtr. being taken over without payment of any compensation. NHAI affidavit (paragraph 12) states that the NHAI will undertake a fresh acquisition process in terms of National Highway Act, 1956, and compensation for this additional area of 500 sq.mtr would be paid to the petitioner.

6. The petitioner's only grievance is that the petitioner's property was taken over in 2012. After that, the petitioner pursued the matter with the State Government and NHAI Authority. Both the authorities, while seeing the apparent merit in the petitioner's grievance, wrote letters to each other on the subject. But except for such inter se correspondence, nothing has been done to date towards the acquisition of this additional portion and payment of compensation to the petitioner for this additional portion. We see considerable merit in the contention of Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, to this effect.

7. Although, there is no dispute of facts, we refer to the communication dated 27 August 2020 addressed by the Executive Engineer of the National Highway Division to the Chief Engineer, Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Konkan Bhavan, about payment of compensation for acquiring lands. Paragraphs 4(d) and 5(b) of this communication are relevant and are transcribed below for the convenience of reference.

'4(d). There are some additional claims arised from land owners where lands have been said to be taken into use under the work and the same have not been awarded and paid yet for which CALA has directed to submit the proposal for private negotiation and direct purchase. These proposal referred to this office by CALA as under;

5(b).It is requested to issue guidelines regarding the further balance award payment of Rs.15.68 crore to be made to land owners as and when the demand arises and also to the above 2 no. of land owners whose lands have been taken for use but not awarded and paid the compensation.'

8. Despite the above communication dated 27 August 2022, no steps were taken to initiate acquisition of the additional area of 500 sq.mtr. and payment of compensation. The above communication admits having taken over possession of an additional area of 500 sq.mtr. and the need to acquire this additional portion by payment of compensation to the petitioner.

9. Ms. Swati Thavil, Deputy Commissioner (Acquisition) has filed the detailed affidavit in this matter. Paragraph 3(e), 3(k), 3(p) of this affidavit are important and are transcribed below for the convenience of reference.

'E) However, inadvertently the said area of 500 sq. meters (i.e. 0.05 R) was written in the Joint Measurement Sheet was 0.005 R i.e. 50 sq. mtrs. Therefore, there was a material discrepancy in the Joint Measurement Sheet thereby showing the concerned area less by 450 sq. meters.

K) The said measurement revealed that the portion of Survey No. 27/11 of Vill