The competent authority must refer disputes over compensation apportionment to the Principal Civil Court as per Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act.

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. It has been stated that the land, in S.F.No.276/3, in Arasur Village, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District, measuring 1.39 acres, had been sold to Sennimalai Gounder, the grand father of the petitioners, for a valid sale consideration, by way of a registered Sale Deed, dated 29.6.1951. Since then, Sennimalai Gounder had been in absolute possession and enjoyment of the said property. After his death the petitioners had been in absolute possession and enjoyment of the lands in question.

3. It has been further stated that the legal heirs of Krishna Gounder had effected a partition, among themselves, by way of a Partition Deed, including the lands which had already been sold by their father. The land purchased by the grand father of the petitioners had also been included in the Partition Deed. While so, the first respondent had initiated land acquisition proceedings, under the National Highways Act, 1956, for acquiring the land in S.F.No.276/3A, for the purpose of laying a highway, between Sangapalli and Valayar highway. The first respondent had conducted an award enquiry, in which the petitioners had participated. Necessary documents had also been produced by the petitioners in support of their claim. The second respondent had also participated in the said award enquiry, based on a patta granted to him, erroneously. The second respondent has no right or title in the land acquired by the first respondent. However, the first respondent, in his proceedings, dated 30.8.2011, apportioned the amount of compensation awarded to the various claimants, including the second respondent. Therefore, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition before this court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent it has been stated that the order, dated 30.8.2011, had been passed by the first respondent after taking into consideration all the relevant documents produced by the parties concerned, as there was no doubt with regard to the ownership or the extent of lands owned by the writ petitioners and the second respondent. The writ petitioners did not prove their ownership in respect of the entire extent of 1310 square metres of land, acquired for the purpose of laying the highway. The land, in S.F.No.276/3A, in Arasur Village, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District, had been sub divided. However, the first respondent did not find any dispute in the ownership of the land in question and therefore, he did not have any doubt in apportioning the amount of compensation paid for the acquisition of the land in question. As such, the first respondent had not taken the role of the civil court in deciding the dispute relating to the ownership of the land in question, as alleged by the writ petitioners. Therefore, the question of referring the matter to a civil court, under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, did not arise.

5. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of second respondent it has been stated that the present writ petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable, as the only remedy available to the petitioners is before the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government, as contemplated under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. It has been stated that the land which had been acquired by the first respondent had, originally, belonged to one Krishna Gounder the paternal grandfather of the second respondent. The said Krishna Gounder had purchased an extent of 1.39 acres in Survey No.276/3, Arasur Village, Sulur Taluk, along with certain other properties, under a registered Sale Deed, dated 20.5.1918. Thereafter, Krishna Gounder had sold an extent of 93 cents, out of the total extent of 1.39 acres, in S.F.No.276/3, to his brother Sennimalai Gounder, under a Sale Deed, dated 29.6.1951. Krishna Gou