Landowners who consent to compensation payments to others cannot later claim entitlement to that compensation, as their consent is binding.

ORDER :

(P.B. BALAJI, J.)

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to update the names of the petitioners in the list of affected parties for receiving compensation, after deleting the names of the respondents 3 to 5 in the records maintained by the second respondent.

2. I have heard Mr.M.Jayakumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.S.Kameswaran, learned Government Advocate for the second respondent, Mr.P.Karthick, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr.S.Malaikani, learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4. The fifth respondent, despite being served, has not chosen to appear either in person or through a counsel.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.M.Jayakumar, would submit that the lands, belonging to the petitioners, were acquired by the National Highways Authority of India, by issuing Notification under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956 on 02.09.2011. He would further submit that in furtherance of the Notification issued under Section 3-D of the National Highways Act, 1956 on 09.08.2012, an award was passed under Section 3-G of the National Highways Act, 1956 on 15.03.2013.

4. It is the case of the writ petitioners that the writ petitioners had entered into an unregistered agreement of sale with the respondents 3 to 5 on 06.07.2014. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the said agreement was not proceeded with and in the absence of any registered sale deed in favour of the respondents 3 to 5, they were not entitled to receive the compensation amount in respect of Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the National Highways Act, 1956 . The learned counsel would further submit that the agreement of sale was much after the award came to be passed on 06.07.2014 and therefore, on the date of the agreement of sale, no right was conferred on the respondents 3 to 5, to claim any compensation for the Land Acquisition Proceedings, as the agreement itself was a void transaction. The learned counsel would further contend that the respondents 3 to 5 were not entitled to receive any further compensation.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.8003 of 2019 (Shiv Kumar & Another V. Union of India & Ors.) dated 14.10.2019, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the original land owner cannot be deprived of higher compensation by conferring rights on alienees, whose purchasers were void. He would invite my attention to the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the provisions of Act 30 of 2013 deem to do away with all intermeddles, by ensuring payment in the Bank account of land holders under Section 77 of the Act.

6. He would place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.6342 and 6343 of 2012 (V.Chandrasekaran @ Anr. V. The Administrative Officer & Ors.) dated 18.09.2012, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the vendors were not competent to make any transfer, as none of them had good title over the suit land. It was therefore held that any and all sale transactions are illegal and void and the sale-deeds executed in favour of the appellants, do not confer upon them, any title. It was further held that the subsequent purchasers cannot challenge the validity of the land acquisition.

7. He would place reliance on the judgment of the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court, in Writ-C No.30608 of 2018 ( Sursati V. State of U.P and others ), dated 05.09.2022, where one of the questions framed by the Full Bench was as to whether a subsequent purchaser of the land acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956 , after publication of declaration under Section 3D(1), was entitled to receive compensation on the strength of his vendor's title in view of Section 3D(2). Answering the said issue, the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court, held that the persons who purchased the land, after determinatio