RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Ashok Kumar Gaur, J.
Nirmala Rathore & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15829/2019
Decided On : 18-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to land acquisition notifications (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioners' objections and arguments against acquisition (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 14) |
| 3. cala's determination and award of compensation (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. respondents' counterarguments and maintainability issues (Para 21 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. court's legal reasoning on objections and acquisition validity (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 6. final judgment and dismissal of petition (Para 35 , 39 , 50) |
JUDGMENT
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the validity of notification dated 21.08.2018 and declaration dated 21.12.2018 issued under Section 3A(1) and 3D respectively of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT , 1956 (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the Act of 1956') and the award dated 08.03.2019 passed under Section 3G of the Act of 1956.
2. The facts, as pleaded in the writ petition, in nutshell, are that father of the petitioners had purchased land in February, 2002 admeasuring 0.64 hectare in Khasra No.4177 of village Pinan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Alwar. The land use of the aforesaid land was converted for petrol pump measuring 1973.94 Sq.Mtrs. and further the land was converted for commercial use vide order dated 27.01.2004, as per the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Rajgarh, District Alwar and the remaining land 2092.20 Sq.Mtrs. remained unconverted as 'Barani'.
3. The petitioners have pleaded that their father after setting up a petrol pump, as allotted to him by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, executed a gift deed of an area measuring 2092.20 Sq.Mtrs. in favour of the petitioners-four daughters and mutation was also sanctioned accordingly by the revenue authorities. The father of the petitioners transferred the dealership in favour of his four daughters in the name of M/s.Jai Ambey Indian Oil Company on 25.11.2010.
4. The petitioners have further pleaded that after demise of their father, the land admeasuring 1973.94 Sq.Mtrs. was mutated in the name of the petitioners viz., Vimla, Sarla, Nirmala and Urmila and due to demise of Smt.Vimla in the year 2018, her share was transferred to her legal representatives i.e. proforma respondents No.5 to 7 viz., Bajrang Singh, Krishna Kumar and Suman. The petitioners have pleaded that they and the proforma respondents are in the possession of the land in question being recorded khatedars and owners.
5. The petitioners have pleaded that the respondent-Ministry of Road, Transport and Highway, Government of India, New Delhi in order to acquire the land belonging to the petitioners and others for the purpose of building (widening/two/four laning with paved shoulder etc.) maintenance, management and operation of National Highway No.148N in the stretch of the land from KM 79.395 to KM 149 in the District Alwar, Rajasthan, issued notification dated 21.08.2018 under Section 3 A(1) of the Act of 1956. The said notification was also published in the daily newspapers-Times of India and Dainik Bhaskar, as per Section 3 A(3) of the Act of 1956 and further objections were invited from the aggrieved persons.
6. The petitioners have pleaded that the Additional Collector, Alwar was appointed as Competent Authority and Land Acquisition Officer (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the CALA') to hear the objections in response to the notification issued under Section 3A(1) of the Act of 1956.
7. The petitioners have further pleaded that they filed their objections within the prescribed period indicating that nature of the land was wrongly shown as Barani because the said land had already been converted for commercial purpose i.e. for running petrol pump and the remaining land was residential.
8. The petitioners objected that their father being a freedom fighter was allotted a petrol pump and as such after his death, the petrol pump was the only source of livelihood and they had made a huge investment for commissioning and running of the said petrol pump. The petitioners also r
Dr.G.H.Grant vs. The State of Bihar
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Darius Shapur Chenai & Ors.
Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Masood Ahmed Khan & Ors.
Laxmi Devi vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
Nareshbhai Bhagubhai & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors.
Raghbir Singh Sehrawat vs. State of Haryana & Ors.
SJS Business Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.
State of UP & Ors. vs. Hari Ram & Ors.
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 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....
The court emphasized the importance of timely filing of objections in land acquisition proceedings and the limited scope of judicial review in such matters, particularly when the project is for publi....
The court clarified that the declaration of land as a National Highway before acquisition and the Competent Authority's order under the 1956 Act do not require strict adherence to judicial procedures....
Acquisition of Land -Petitioner, being a person interested in the land acquired, is not precluded from raising his claim before the competent authority on issuance of the notification under Section 3....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following statutory procedures and respecting the orders of the constitutional courts in land acquisition matters under the Natio....
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.