Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned.

2. The petitioner has stated that he is a practicing surgeon and that he is having his nursing home, at Salem. All his family members are doctors and they are rendering service to the society, in the medical field. The petitioner had intended to develop his nursing home to serve the people in the locality. While so, the respondents had acquired parts of the lands belonging to him, in piecemeal, defeating his intention to develop the nursing home. The respondents had acquired a total extent of 80,898 square feet of the lands belonging to the petitioner, by way of three notifications. The lands in question were predominantly agricultural lands and they had been acquired for forming a road. The act of the respondents is patently irregular, as it is against the relevant provisions of law.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the action of the respondents in issuing the impugned notification, under Section 3-G of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). is illegal and therefore, it is liable to be quashed. The impugned proceedings had been issued by the