IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
E. Suganthi & Others - Appellant
Versus
The Union of India Rep. by its Secretary To Government, Govt. of India Ministry of Road Transport & Highways, New Delhi & Others - Respondent
W.P. NO. 30969 OF 2013 & W.P. NOS. 11953 TO 11955 OF 2014
Decided On : 06-06-2022
National Highways Act - Acquisition of Lands - Sections 3(D)(1), 3(G)(3) & (4) - The court upheld the acquisition of lands for the construction of a six-way lane under the National Highways Act. The petitioners' objections were overruled, and the court found that the acquisition proceedings followed the provisions of the Act. The court also rejected the petitioners' contentions regarding the safety of the road, the effectiveness of the enquiry, and the resumption of lands. The court emphasized the limited right to object under the Act and the necessity of expert opinion for project viability.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the acquisition of their lands for the construction of a six-way lane, alleging safety concerns and improper acquisition proceedings. They argued that the lands were not put to use and should be resumed back to them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the acquisition proceedings followed the provisions of the National Highways Act and upheld the acquisition of lands for the six-way lane. The court rejected the petitioners' contentions regarding safety, the effectiveness of the enquiry, and the resumption of lands.
Issues: Safety concerns of road construction, effectiveness of the enquiry, and resumption of lands not put to use.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the limited right to object under the Act and the necessity of expert opinion for project viability. It held that the lands would be put to use for the purpose for which it was acquired, and there was no provision for resumption of lands back to the original owners.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed, and the court upheld the acquisition of lands for the construction of a six-way lane under the National Highways Act.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: W.P. No.30969 of 2013 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings pursuant to the Notification dated 30.09.2013 of the 1st respondent published in Government of India Gazette No.2274 SC 2952 (E) and the Notification dated 29.10.2013 under Section 3 (g) (3) & (4) of the National Highways Act and quash the same insofar as it relates to the land of the petitioner measuring an extent of 57 sq. mtrs., in Survey No.67/2B1 and 125 sq.mtrs., in Survey No.67/1C1 of Thandalkazhani Village, Tiruvellore District.
W.P. No.11953 of 2014 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings pursuant to the Notification dated 30.09.2013 of the 1st respondent published in Government of India Gazette No.2274 SC 2952 (E) and the Notification dated 29.10.2013 under Section 3 (g) (3) & (4) of the National Highways Act and quash the same insofar as it relates to the land of the petitioner measuring an extent of 34, 20 and 33 sq.mtrs. in Survey No.115/4A1B1, 115/4A2A and 115/4A1C1 of Padianallur Village, Tiruvellore District.
W.P. No.11954 of 2014 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings pursuant to the Notification dated 30.09.2013 of the 1st respondent published in Government of India Gazette No.2274 SC 2952 (E) and the Notification dated 29.10.2013 under Section 3 (g) (3) & (4) of the National Highways Act and quash the same insofar as it relates to the land of the petitioner measuring an extent of 43 sq. mtrs. in Survey No.121/6 of Padianallur Village, Tiruvellore District.
W.P. No.11955 of 2014 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the proceedings pursuant to the Notification dated 30.09.2013 of the 1st respondent published in Government of India Gazette No.2274 SC 2952 (E) and the Notification dated 29.10.2013 under Section 3 (g) (3) & (4) of the National Highways Act and quash the same insofar as it relates to the land of the petitioner measuring an extent of 290 sq. mtrs. in Survey No.184/17A of Padianallur Village, Tiruvellore District.)
Common Order:
1. The present writ petitions have been filed assailing the acquisition of the lands made by the respondents/National Highways Authority for the construction of six way lane as bad and the consequential notification issued u/s 3 (D) (1) and Section 3 (G) (3) and (4) are perverse.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners of the lands and have been carrying on their export business activity in the said lands, thereby attracting a large volume of foreign exchange. It is the further case of the petitioners that for the purpose of laying down NH-5 Road of the Chennai – TADA Section, lands were sought to be acquired by issuance of Notification in the year 2000 u/s 3 (A) 3 of the National Highways Act (for short ‘the Act’) to which the petitioners submitted their objections and after affording an opportunity of hearing, the objections were overruled and portion of the lands of the petitioners were acquired. However, even at that time, the respondents had stated that there would be no further acquisition of the balance lands of the petitioner.
3. It is the further case of the petitioners that much to their shock and surprise, by issuance of Notification on 17.12.2009 u/s 3 (A) 3 of the Act, further extent of about 912 sq. mtrs., along with building was sought to be acquired for the purpose of expansion of the National Highway and objections were called for to which the petitioners submitted their objections. However, the said objections were mechanically overruled by the respondents, which prompted the filing of W.P. No.13413 of 2010 in which this Court ha
Delhi Administration Vs. Gurdip Singh Uban & Ors. (1999 (7) SCC 44)
The main legal point established in the judgment is that land acquisition proceedings can be challenged after the passing of the award in exceptional cases, and the acquisition must be for a public p....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that land acquisition proceedings can be challenged after the passing of the award and receipt of compensation in exceptional cases falling within ....
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....
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.