2025 Supreme(Ker) 528
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
Mano Alex W/o Alex Mathew - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, Represented by Secretary to Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi - Respondent
WP (C) No. 10240 of 2020
Decided On : 02-04-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BY ADV C.K.SHERIN
For the Respondent: BY ADVS. SHRI.C.DINESH, SENIOR PANEL COUNSEL M/S.M.V.KINI AND CO., SC, NHAI SRI.E.C.KURIAKOSE
IMPORTANT POINT
The authority determining compensation for land acquisition must consider comprehensive factors beyond revenue records, including market value and actual use of the land.
Headnote:
(A) National Highways Act, 1956 - Section 3A and 3G - Writ petition challenging notification for land acquisition - Petitioner contended that acquisition was not for public purpose as per Section 3A - Court directed that the petitioner may raise contentions regarding compensation determination - Authority must consider land's market value and nature beyond revenue records. (Paras 1 , 4 , 7 , 8 )
(B) Land Acquisition - Determination of compensation - Authority must not solely rely on revenue records but consider comprehensive factors including market value, physical nature, and prior use of land. (Paras 7 , 8 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged a notification for land acquisition under the National Highways Act, asserting it was not for public purpose and sought compensation for land classified as 'purayidom'. The court noted the need for the authority to consider the land's actual use and market value.
Findings of Court:
The court permitted the petitioner to present claims regarding compensation, emphasizing that the authority must assess the land's value based on comprehensive criteria.
Issues: The main issues included whether the acquisition was for public purpose and how compensation should be determined.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the authority must consider various factors beyond revenue records when determining compensation, including market value and the land's actual use.
Result: Writ petition disposed of, allowing the petitioner to raise contentions in compensation determination.
JUDGMENT :
The above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P1 notification issued under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short 'the Act, 1956'). Going by Section 3A of the Act, 1956 the acquisition could be made if the land is required for a public purpose, for the building, maintenance, management or operation of a national highway or part thereof and the contention of the petitioner is that the present acquisition is not for any of the purposes mentioned in Section 3A of the Act, 1956 and therefore, the proceedings initiated as per Ext.P1 is liable to be interfered with. It is seen that subsequently the petitioner restricted the reliefs to the extent of seeking a direction to the NHAI to acquire the small portion of land left out from the 3A notification as the same cannot be utilised by the petitioner for any other purpose and to pay compensation for the acquired land treating the property as “purayidom”.
2. When the matter came up for consideration on 17.07.2020 this Court clarified that the National Highway Authorities are entitled for 3D publication, but they were injuncted from taking further action after the 3D publication, without obtaining further orders from this Court. Later a subsequent order was issued on 20.08.2020 wherein this Court has observed that the petitioner's genuine concern is that the remaining land will be rendered useless and if that portion of the land is also acquired, her grievance will be redressed to a certain extent. Thereupon the petitioner's request was directed to be addressed by the Project Director for acquiring the remaining land which cannot be utilised by the petitioner for any purpose or to refix the alignment, so that the petitioner is able to use the balance land and also directed that appropriate decision shall be taken by the Project Director.
3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National Highway Authority would submit that the issue was considered, and the Authority has decided to acquire the balance land, for which a fresh notification is to be issued.
4. The issue now projected by the petitioner is in respect of the determination of the land value of the property covered by Ext.P1, 3A notification published as per the Act, 1956. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that at the time of 3A notification the property was classified as a paddy land in the revenue records though the same was converted even prior to the coming into force of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008(in short 'the Act, 2008'). The Form 5 application filed by the petitioner before the Revenue Divisional Officer as per the provisions of the Act, 2008 was allowed as per Exts.P5 and P6 ordering removal of the property of the petitioner from the data bank. Later, Form 7 application under Section 27A of the Act, 2008 was submitted by the petitioner and a direction was issued by this Court in W.P.(C)Nos.35050 & 35289 of 2024 to the authorities to consider the Form 7 application submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner submits that till date no action has been taken on the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is entitled for compensation by treating the nature of the land as 'purayidom' and not as a paddy land.
5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National Highway Authority as well as the learned Government Pleader would submit that as per the Act, 1956 there are several other stages of proceedings as part of the acquisition of land, which includes proceedings under Section 3G of the Act, 1956 which deals with the determination of the amount payable as compensation. Going by Section 3G(i), if any land is acquired under the Act, 1956 they shall be paid an amount which shall be determined by an order of the competent authority and that going by Section 3G, public notice will be issued inviting claim from all persons interested in the land notified to be acquired. It is further submitted that any