SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3561

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
The Deputy General Manager (T) cum Project Director - Appellant 
Versus 
The District Collector - Respondent 
W.P.(MD)Nos.24617, 24618, 24619, 24620, 24621, 24622, 24623, 24624, 27531, 27532, 27760 & 27761 of 2022 AND WMP(MD)Nos.18694, 18696, 18697, 18716, 18718, 18710, 18711, 18699, 18703, 18698, 18700, 18701, 18704, 18702, 18705, 21629, 21630, 21845 & 21846 of 2022
Decided on : 07-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Su.Srinivasan
For the Respondents:Mr.Veera Kathiravan, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.K.Balasubramaniyan

The District Collector exceeded jurisdiction by directing redetermination of compensation under the National Highways Act, as awards were already made prior to the 2013 Act's applicability.

Headnote:(A) National Highways Act, 1956 - Sections 3(a), 3-G, 3-A(1), 3-D(1) - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24 - Writ petitions challenging redetermination awards for land acquisition - The District Collector's direction for redetermination was held to be without jurisdiction as the competent authority had already passed awards prior to 01.01.2015, making the provisions of the 2013 Act inapplicable - The court emphasized that statutory authorities must act within their conferred powers and that arbitrary actions without statutory basis are invalid. (Paras 6, 8, 9, 10)

(B) Jurisdiction - The principle of useless formality was invoked regarding the non-joinder of necessary parties, as the illegality was evident on the face of the proceedings. (Paras 4, 11)

Facts of the case:
The writ petitioner, the National Highways Authority of India, challenged the redetermination awards issued by the District Collector for lands acquired for highway widening, arguing that the awards were made under the National Highways Act, 1956 prior to the applicability of the 2013 Act.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the District Collector acted beyond jurisdiction in directing redetermination awards and that the competent authority had already fulfilled its statutory duties.

Issues: The main issues included the jurisdiction of the District Collector to issue redetermination awards and the applicability of the 2013 Act to the awards made under the National Highways Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the District Collector exceeded his authority by issuing directions for redetermination, as the competent authority had already made awards under the NH Act prior to the 2013 Act's applicability.

Result: Writ petitions allowed.

ORDER :

The Deputy General Manager (T) cum Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, PIU – Nagercoil is the writ petitioner in all these writ petitions. In WP(MD)Nos.24617, 24618, 24619, 24620, 24621, 24622, 24623, 24624, 27531, 27532 of 2022, the direction issued by the District Collector, Kanyakumari and the consequential redetermination awards passed by the Competent Authority and Special District Revenue Officer (LA), National Highways, Tirunelveli @ Nagercoil are under challenge. In the remaining two writ petitions, the consequential redetermination awards passed by the authority alone have been questioned.

2.The basic facts are not in dispute. The second respondent herein was appointed as Competent Authority for the project vide Notification No.1197 and S.O. No. 2078(E) dated 20.08.2008 in exercise of the powers conferred to the Central Government under Section 3(a) of the National Highways Act, 1956. Lands were acquired under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 for the widening of NH-47B (Nagercoil to Kavalkinaru Section). Notifications issued under Section 3-A(1) and Section 3-D(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 were published in 2010-2011. The notifications included 22 villages in Kanyakumari District and one village in Tirunelveli District. The competent authority passed awards determining the compensation for the following villages on the dates correspondingly mentioned in the following table :

Sl No .Name of the village3A Notification3D NotificationAward date Dateof deposit
1.Perungudi25.01.2010 09.12.201011.4.201201.09.2012
2.Theroor (NH-47B)25.01.2010 09.12.201024.08.201229.09.2012
3.Aralvoimozhi25.01.2010 09.12.201002.07.201422.08.2014
4.Thirupathisaram (NH-47)20.04.2010 08.04.201106.06.201302.07.2013
5.Thirupathisaram (NH-47B)26.02.2010 07.02.201128.03.201323.04.2013
6.Eraviputhur26.02.2010 07.02.201117.12.201315.02.2014
7.Kappiyarai23.03.2010 25.02.201127.10.201408.12.2014
8.Aloor23.03.2010 25.02.201123.06.201411.09.2014
9.Theroor (NH-47)09.04.2010 08.04.201129.01.201422.04.2014
10.Kunnathoor10.06.2010 24.05.201111.08.201409.09.2014
11.Thovalai12.04.2010 08.04.201103.09.201428.09.2014
12.Kalkulam12.04.2010 08.04.201119.09.201411.10.2014

Though the notification was in respect of 23 villages, compensation in respect of 15 villages were determined under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and compensation in respect of the remaining 8 villages was determined as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. This disparity in grant of compensation gave rise to considerable heart burn and led to widespread agitation and protests. The aggrieved land owners wanted redetermination of their compensation in terms of the 2013 Act. This issue was taken up by the District Collector, Kanyakumari District who vide proceedings dated 04.05.2022 accorded his concurrence for passing revised award under the new Act in respect of the aforementioned villages (10) except Kalkulam and Eraviputhoor. Pursuant to the said proceedings, the competent authority passed the impugned redetermination awards enhancing the compensation payable to the persons whose lands were acquired. The stand of the writ petitioner/NHAI is that even though the proceedings of the District Collector, Nagercoil dated 04.05.2022 pertained only to ten villages, the competent authority passed redetermination awards in respect of two more villages. Challenging the redetermination, these writ petitions have been filed.

3.The learned standing counsel for NHAI reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions. His primary contention is that the impugned proceedings are illegal and without jurisdiction. He pointed out that all the awards in the instant cases were passed prior to 01.01.2015. Relying on the decisions reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Raj 77 (Gopa Ram vs Union of India) and 2021 SCC OnLine AP 3194 (Lank

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top