Landowners cannot be deprived of access and must be compensated at current market value for land acquisition, as established under Section 3G of the National Highways Act.

JUDGMENT :

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J.

CM-10223-CWP-2024

Application is allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions. Annexure P-17 is taken on record.

Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place with its paging.

Main Case:

1. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 16.11.2021 whereby proposal for access permission to the property of the petitioner has been denied and order dated 04.03.2022 whereby the respondent accepted to acquire the balance land of the petitioner but at the rates on which land was acquired earlier passed by respondent No.3 being contrary to the law and Un-Constitutional.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner-Company is the owner in possession of land situated at village Bhondsi, Tehsil Sohna, District Gurugram, total measuring 14 kanals 3 marlas as detailed in paragraph No.2 of the petition to the extent of 18/68^th share. The same was purchased by the petitioner-Company in the month of September- 2012 and the mutation thereof, was duly sanctioned vide mutation No.20257. The land is abutting to the National Highway namely Sohana to Gurugram, which is evident from the site plan appended to the petition.

3. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highway had decided to take up the development of the National Highways by constructing the 6 Lane Highway for smooth flow of traffic. An acquisition of land was proposed for establishment and construction of Toll Plaza on NH-248A alongwith, its office and other ancillary building. The said acquired area belonging to the petitioner has been demarcated in Pink Colour in the site plan attached as Annexure P-3 with the present writ petition.

4. It is contended by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that after acquisition of the said land for construction of toll plaza, the respondent-National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) constructed a boundary wall along the said acquired land which is reflected as Colour Blue in the site plan. The balance 2267 sq. yards of land, which remains under the ownership of petitioner-Company, has been shown in Colour Green as per the said site plan. Counsel contends that on account of the construction of the boundary wall, the petitioner has been denied access to and utilization of the said balance land. He contends that the petitioner has made numerous representations to the respondent- National Highways Authority of India for providing an access; however, the respondents had refused to provide the said access. It was thus proposed by the petitioner that in case the respondents are not providing access to the balance land of the petitioner, due to which it has been rendered unworthy of any utilization by the petitioner, the left out balance land may also be acquired by the respondent- National Highways Authority of India in terms of Sub-Section 7(a) of Section 3G of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT , 1956. He makes a reference to the communication dated 18.01.2022 (Annexure P-12) received from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Govt. of India, wherein it has been conveyed by the respondents that subject to the petitioner submitting the proof/details showing that the land has become land locked, the National Highways Authority of India shall acquire the balance land also at the same rates on which the land was acquired by the National Highways Authority of India previously.

5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondents have failed to dispute the fact that on account of construction of the boundary wall shown in Co