IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, JJ.
Anjana Devi, W/o Sri Bishwanath Prasad – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
L.P.A No. 501 of 2022
Decided on : 04-08-2023
The National Highways Act, 1956 - Dispute over Land Compensation - The court dismissed the writ petition seeking compensation for a piece of land, stating that the dispute regarding the land could not be decided in a writ proceeding and that the petitioner should seek a declaration of her right, title, and interest over the land from a competent civil court.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner sought compensation from the National Highway Authority of India for a piece of land but the court dismissed the petition, advising the petitioner to seek a declaration of her right, title, and interest over the land from a competent civil court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute over the land could not be decided in a writ proceeding and advised the petitioner to seek a declaration of her right, title, and interest over the land from a competent civil court.
Issues: Dispute over land compensation and the maintainability of the writ petition involving a dispute regarding right, title, and interest over immovable property.
Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition involving a dispute regarding right, title, and interest over immovable property is not maintainable except in cases where the claim of the applicant is admitted by the respondent.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the L.P.A No.501 of 2022, upholding the writ court's order dated 12th May 2022.
ORDER :
The writ petitioner who was seeking compensation from the National Highway Authority of India (in short, “NHAI) for a piece of land ad-measuring about 20 decimals is aggrieved of the order dated 12th May 2022 by which W.P(C) No.3771 of 2020 filed by her has been dismissed with a liberty to her to seek a declaration from a competent Court of civil jurisdiction as regards her right, title and interest over the said land.
2. The writ Court has observed as under:
3. At the outset, Mrs. Sweety Topno, the learned counsel for the NHAI states that compensation for the construction made by the appellant over the property has been calculated and it is now open to the appellant to receive the compensation amount lying with the District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority at Hazaribag forthwith, if not already received.
4. Mr. Manoj Tandon, the learned counsel for the appellant refers to section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 to submit that the Gazette Notification published by the competent authority contains the description of land purchased by the appellant through sale-deed dated 26th September 2007. However, a dispute has been sought to be raised on the ground that the land claimed by the appellant is comprised under Khata No.1/1 whereas the land which has been acquired is comprised under Khata No.1.
5. The submission made on behalf of the appellant is that notwithstanding this dispute it stands admitted that 20 decimals land comprised in Plot No.45/941 at Mauza-Dudhpania within Pargana-Barsaut Thana No.144 in Thana-Barhi, District-Hazaribag belongs to the appellant and, therefore, she is entitled for compensation thereto. On the other hand, Mrs. Sweety Topno, the learned counsel for the NHAI has placed reliance on the order dated 15th May 2015 by which the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division at Hazaribag has transferred 0.5025 acres Gair Mazarua Khas Parti Kadim land comprised under Thana No.144 of Khata No.1 in Plot No.45 in its favour free of cost.
6. Therefore a dispute was raised before the writ Court by the NHAI over the claim of the appellant to seek compensation. Now whether 20 decimals land which has been purchased by the appellant through a registered sale-deed dated 26th September 2007 within Plot No.45/941 at Mauza-Dudhpania falls within 0.5025 acres land transferred by the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division is a question of fact which could not have been decided in a writ proceeding. The dispute raised by the NHAI seems to be made on a substantial point in law and not raised only for the sake of opposing the claim of the appellant. This is a well-settled law that a writ petition involving a dispute regarding right, title and interest over immovable property is not maintainable except in cases where the claim of the applicant is admitted by the respondent.
7. Having regard to the aforesaid discussions, we are not inclined to interfere with the writ Court's order dated 12th May 2022 and, accordingly, L.P.A No.501 of 2022 is dismissed.
A writ petition involving a dispute regarding right, title, and interest over immovable property is not maintainable except in cases where the claim of the applicant is admitted by the respondent.
Section 3-G(4) of Act stipulates that such notice shall state particulars of land and shall require all persons interested in such land to appear in person or by an agent or by a legal practitioner b....
when the suit is pending before the competent Civil Court, the rights can be crystallized only by the competent Civil Court not by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to resolve title disputes regarding compensation entitlement, which must be adjudicated by the civil court.
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.