Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Dr. Nupur Bhati, J.
Mohammad Zaki – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4095 of 2020
Decided On : 29-03-2023
LAND ACQUISITION - NATIONAL HIGHWAY ACT, 1956 - SECTION 3A, 3D - RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 - ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR HIGHWAY WIDENING - FAILURE TO INCLUDE LAND IN NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 3A - DEPRIVATION OF OPPORTUNITY TO FILE OBJECTION - RIGHT TO COMPENSATION.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, owner of a commercial land, challenged the acquisition of his land for highway widening under the National Highway Act, 1956. The petitioner's land was not included in the initial notification under Section 3A, and he was not given an opportunity to file objections. Subsequently, the land was acquired, and the highway was constructed.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the acquisition proceedings were illegal as the petitioner was deprived of the mandatory opportunity to file objections due to the omission of his land in the notification under Section 3A. However, considering that the highway had already been constructed, the court directed the petitioner to approach the Land Acquisition Officer for compensation.
Issues: 1. Whether the acquisition of the petitioner's land without including it in the notification under Section 3A was illegal? 2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to compensation for the acquired land?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the judgment in Smt. Renu Kasat Vs. Union of India & Ors., which held that the acquisition of land without including it in the notification under Section 3A was illegal. 2. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to compensation for the acquired land, which should be determined by the Land Acquisition Officer considering the nature of the land and the current market value.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach the Land Acquisition Officer for compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer was directed to decide the matter within three months from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Dr.Nupur Bhati, J. - The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition for the following prayers :-
i) The impugned notifications dated 05.05.2014 bearing no. S.O. 1213(E) (Annex.5) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
ii) That in the alternative it is directed to the respondent no.2 either restore back possession of petitioner’s land to the petitioner or compensation in accordance with the 1st to 4th Schedules of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
iii) The respondents may kindly be directed to not to interfere in the possession of the petitioner since no notification under Section 3A (1) has been issued against the petitioner."
2. The petitioner has set up a case that vide registered sale-deed dated 04.02.1998 a land was purchased bearing Khasra No.361/1 (later on re-numbered as 361/08 and presently it is shown as 361/08 in Jamabandi) situated at village Kakani, Tehsil Luni, District Jodhpur. The petitioner’s name had also been entered in the revenue case of Godavari as a Khatedar, which is evident from the Jamabandi placed on record.
3. The petitioner applied for conversion of his agricultural land to non-agricultural usage and conversion of the agricultural land was accordingly done vide conversion order dated 30.12.1998 for commercial purpose (petrol pump).
4. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 3A(1) of the National Highway Act, 1956, a notification under Section 3A was published in the Official Gazette on 12.7.2013 by the Central Government for the purpose of acquiring certain lands around National Highway No.65 in the stretch of land from Km 308/0 to Km. 378/115 (Jodhpur-Pali Section) in order to widen/four-laning, etc., for maintenance, management and operation of National Highway No.65. However, the said Gazette Notification dated 12.7.2013 (Annex.4) did not specifically include the petitioner’s land.
5. Thereafter notification dated 05.05.2014 (Annex.5) was issued by the Central Government under Section 3 D(1) of the Act of 1956 wherein it was stated that vide the notification dated 12.07.2013 published in Official Gazette under Section 3, Sub- Section (ii) and Sub-Section (1) of Section 3A of the Act, the Central Government had declared its intention to acquire the land specified in the Schedule annexed to the said notification for building (widening/four-laning, etc.) maintenance, management and operation of National Highway No.65 and further mentioned that in pursuance of notification dated 12.07.2014 objections were received and the same were considered and disallowed by the competent authority. In the aforementioned notification, the petitioner’s land has been included at Sr. No.159 and the nature of the land was mentioned as ’petrol pump’.
6. The petitioner is aggrieved of the fact that he has been deprived of mandatory opportunity of filing objection against the proposed acquisition owing to this illegal omission in the notification issued under Section 3A of the Act of 1956.
7. The petitioner was shocked that on the same day i.e. 05.05.2014 another notification was published in Gazette wherein the Central Government gave brief description of the land for building (widening/four-laning, etc.) maintenance, management and operation of National Highway No.65 on the stretch of land from Km.308/00 to Km. 378/115 (Jodhpur-Pali section) in Jodhpur district from Km. 308/000 to Km. 336/400 in the State of Rajasthan.
8. Vide this notification also objections were invited from the interested persons in the land mentioned in the Schedule of the notification within a period of 21 days of publication of the notification.
9. However, the petitioner’s land was again not included in the notification dated 05.05.2014 (Annex.6). The petitioner submitted a detailed representation before the respondent no.2 i.e. the Additional District Collector-III cum Land Acquisition Officer, Jodhpur ventilating his grievance followed by a reminder dated 22
The acquisition of land without including it in the notification under Section 3A of the National Highway Act, 1956, is illegal, and the affected landowner is entitled to compensation.
Notifications must meet the statutory requirements and furnish all the details in the notification issued at the first instance. Vague notifications may not be quashed, and the court may direct the r....
Compliance with publication and hearing requirements of the National Highways Act is essential, but non-inclusion of landowner names in notifications does not invalidate the process.
The court established that land once vested with the government under the National Highways Act cannot be reduced without following due legal process.
Land plans and other details of the land covered under the notification are available and can be inspected by the interested persons at the aforesaid office of the competent authority” there is suffi....
The court upheld the validity of land acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act, confirming the necessity of adherence to statutory requirements while emphasizing the priority of public....
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
