The court affirmed that possession of land for public use requires legal authority and compensation, emphasizing that delay cannot bar just claims for compensation.

JUDGMENT :

(M. S. Sonak) :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

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

3. The respondent is the owner of the property admeasuring 3 Ha-39 Ares of land from Gat No.402 situated in Village Kalewadi, Tal. Indapur, District Pune.

4. By an award dated 7 December 2011, issued by the competent authority, the land measuring 2250 sq.mtrs belonging to the petitioner from Gat No. 402 was acquired. However, the petitioner asserts that possession of 10600 sq.mtrs of land was taken, although the award dated 7 December 2011 only referred to the 2250 sq.mtrs area.

5. On 15 June 2012, the Highway Authority issued a notification on page 61 of the paper book under Section 3(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956, regarding its additional area of 8350 sq.mtrs. However, such notification was not pursued. As a result, neither has any award been made for this additional area, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioner for this extra area.

6. Typically, given the summary nature of our jurisdiction under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution, we would have been reluctant to go into such issues. But, here, we are satisfied that there are no disputed questions of fact. The Authorities have admitted to possessing the additional lands. Even proposals were initiated to acquire this extra land. But because such proposals are not being taken to their logical conclusion the Petitioner was forced to file this petition.

7. The petitioner has placed on record the report from the land survey department dated 20 July 2015, which certifies that the total area of 10600 sq.mtrs. has been acquired from Gat No.402 and even road has been built over the said land. This document is at pages 62 and 63 of the paper book.

8. The petitioner has also placed on record a communication dated 5 March 2013 issued by the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, which is the cover letter of the panchnama that certifies the above position. This document refers to Mr. Mishra's presence on behalf of the Highway Authority, but it notes that Mr. Mishra declined to sign the panchnama. This document is on page 72 of the paper book.

9. The petitioner has also placed on record the communication dated 27 October 2016 addressed by the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) to the Special Land Acquisition Officer-17, Pune. This communication also refers to Gat No.402 at Village Kalewadi, Tal. Indapur, District Pune, states, in no uncertain terms, that the total area affected due to National Highway-9 is 10600 sq.mtrs. This communication further states that out of this area, 2250 sq.mtrs. is already acquired, and the balance area to be acquired is 8350 sq.mtrs. This document is on pages 86 and 87 of the paper book.

10. The petitioner has also placed on record the letter dated 3 March 2017 addressed by the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No.17, Pune to the Project Director of National Highway Authority requiring the NHAI to issue necessary notification regarding the acquisition of additional land from Gat No.402. Based on all the above documents, the petitioner contends that this additional land of 8350 sq.mtrs, of which, the possession is already taken over without the authority of law and without paying any compensation to the petitioner, must be forthwith compensated upon, if necessary, by proceeding to at least now acquire the same.

11. Ms. Aarti Bhosale, Collector (Land Acquisition) No.17, Pune, has filed an affidavit for Respondents Nos.1 and 2. This affidavit shows that at least the State Government has not raised any serious dispute regarding the case set out by the petitioner. The state government has only recorded that it was following up on the matter with the NHAI and has referred to the correspondence with the NHAI on this subject.

12. Paragraph 8 of Ms. Aarti’s affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 is important, and the same is transcribed