IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Chandan Moy Nath And Ors - Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India And Ors - Respondents
WP(C)/442/2025, WP(C) 6644 of 2024
Decided on : 20-03-2025
JUDGMENT :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Both the writ petitions – W.P.[C] no. 6644/2024 & W.P.[C] no. 442/2025 – are instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking inter-alia a direction to the respondent authorities to pay adequate compensation to the petitioners after making proper assessment and valuation in respect of the parcels of land, acquired from the petitioners in both the writ petitions. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to the respondent authorities to comply with the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956, more particularly, Section 3G[5] and Section 3H before taking possession of the parcels of land for the intended public purpose. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to communicate the amounts of compensation determined against their respective parcels of land to the petitioners
2. As both the writ petitions involve issues of similar nature and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, both the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. I have heard Mr. B.U. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions; Mr. C. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent authorities in the National Highway Authority of India [NHAI] and the National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited [NHIDCL]; Ms. A. Bhattacharjee, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue & Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam; and Ms. M. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the State respondents.
4. In the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 6644/2024, five petitioners have joined together to prefer the writ petition. On the other hand, fifteen nos. of petitioners have preferred the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 442/2025. It is stated by the petitioners that they have common cause to espouse.
5. By Notification no. S.O.5615[E] dated 01.12.2022 [Area : 46.4622 Ha] and Notification no. S.O.53[E] dated 05.01.2023 [Area : 17.5864 Ha] issued under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 [‘the N.H. Act’, for short], the Government of India [GoI] in the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways [MoRT&H] in the years 2022 – 2023, declared its intention to acquire the parcels of land specified in the Schedules, annexed to those notifications, for a National Highway Project : ‘Building [widening/four-laning, etc.], maintenance, management and operation of NH37 in the stretch of land from Km. 17+300 in the district of Cachar in the State of Assam’ [‘the Highway Project’, for short]. Prior to those Notifications, the Central Government vide a Notification no. S.O.1786[E] dated 06.05.2021 declared the Additional District Commissioner [then, Additional Deputy Commissioner], Land Acquisition Branch, Cachar as the Competent Authority Land Acquisition [CALA] under Section 3[a] of the N.H. Act. The substances of the Notifications were duly published in two daily newspapers each in compliance of sub-section [3] of Section 3A of the N.H. Act. Objections were thereafter, received and were considered by the Competent Authority Land Acquisition [CALA].
6. Thereafter, the CALA submitted its Report to the Central Government in compliance of the provisions of sub-section [1] of Section 3D of the N.H. Act that the parcels of land specified in the Schedule therein would be acquired for the Highway Project. Thereafter, the Central Government declared vide Notification issued under Section 3D[2] of the N.H. Act on 18.07.2023 that on publication of the Notification in the Official Gazette, lands specified in the Schedule had vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances.
7. The case of the petitioners in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 6644/2024, in brief, is that they are owners and possessors of various periodic patta lands within Village – Gobindapur Part-I, Pargona - Katigorah, Mouza – Gobindapur, District - Cachar, Assam. The petitioners have stated that their parcels of land a
The court ruled that compensation for land acquisition must reflect market value and consider hardships faced by landowners, as mandated by the National Highways Act and RFCTLARR Act.
Petitioner must approach the appointed Arbitrator for grievances regarding compensation assessment under the National Highways Act, 1956.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land compensation; no re-appreciation of evidence.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land compensation awards; no re-appreciation of evidence.
Narrow scope of interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI awards; no re-appreciation of evidence or modification of compensation.
Courts under Sections 34/37 cannot re-appreciate evidence in NHAI arbitration awards; interference limited to perversity or public policy.
Market value for highway land compensation must follow statutory higher of stamp duty rates or average similar land sales using multiple deeds; single dissimilar sale deed use creates patent illegali....
The court affirmed an arbitral award on compensation for land acquisition, stating the determination conformed to relevant statutes, rejecting the appeal for lacking merit.
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.