Back
2019 Supreme(MP) 158
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
R. S. Jha and Sanjay Dwivedi, JJ.
Jang Bahadur Singh & another v. National Highways Authority
of India & Others
Writ Petition No.17401 of 2018; Decided on 13.5.2019
Arun Kumar Pandey for petitioners;
Mohan Sausarkar for respondents/NHAI; Bhoopesh Tiwari, Government Advocate for respondents/State.
Headnote:
Constitution of India -- Art. 226 -- National Highways Act, 1956 -- S.3G(5) and 3G(6) -- National Highways (Manner of Depositing the Amount by the Central Government; Making Requisite Funds Available to the Competent Authority for Acquisition of Land) Rules, 2019 -- R. 3 (i) (b) and 3 (iv) -- disbursement of compensation awarded/enhanced by arbitrator for acquired land -- efficacious statutory alternative remedy available -- entertaining such petitions would render statutory provisions superfluous and otiose -- however, Court is flooded with cases filed by claimants who have not received compensation for one reason or the other -- therefore, petitions disposed with certain observations and directions. [Paras 12, 13 & 15
Hkkjr dk lafo/kku && vuq&226 && jk"Vªh; jktekxZ vf/kfu;e] 1956 && /kkjk 3N ¼5½ rFkk 3N ¼6½ && jk"Vªh; jktekxZ ¼dsanzh; ljdkj }kjk jde fuf{kIr fd, tkus dh jhfr( Hkw&vtZu ds fy, le{k izkf/kdkjh dks vko';d fuf/k miyCèk djkuk½ fu;e] 2019 ¼Lora= vuqokn½ && fu-3 ¼1½ ¼[k½3 ¼4½ && vftZr Hkwfe ds fy, e/;LFk }kjk vf/kfu.hkZr@of/kZr izfrdj dk laforj.k && izHkkoh dkuwuh vkuqdfYid mipkj miyC/k && ,slh ;kfpdk,¡ xzg.k djus ls dkuwuh mica/k vuko';d vkSj fujFkZd gks tk,axs && rFkkfi] U;k;ky; ,sls nkosnkjksa }kjk Qkby fd, x, ekeyksa ls Iyfor gSa ftUgsa fdlh&u&fdlh dkj.ko'k izfrdj izkIr ugha gqvk gS && vr% dfri; leqfä;ksa vkSj funs'kksa ds lkFk ;kfpdk,¡ fujkÑr dh xbZA ¼iSjk 12] 13 ,oa 15
JUDGMENT
1. Heard on the question of admission.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioners claiming relief of a direction to the respondent National Highway Authority of India or the M.P. Road Development Corporation to immediately disburse the compensation, as awarded/enhanced by the Arbitrator in his award, passed under section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1956”).
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the respondents NHAI or the M.P. Road Development Corporation, as the case may be, has acquired their lands under the National Highways Act for the purposes of widening the National Highways and State Highways and the compensation in respect of the lands of the petitioners has been determined by the competent authority.
4. It is stated that in these cases, the matters have also been taken up either by the petitioners or the NHAI or Road Development Corporation before the Arbitrator who has also determined the compensation under section 3G (5) of the Act of 1956. It is submitted that section 3H (5) of the Act of 1956 statutorily requires that in cases where the Arbitrator determines the amount of compensation in excess of the amount determined by the competent authority, the Arbitrator may award interest @ 9% per annum on such excess amount from the date of taking possession under section 3D till the date of actual deposit.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that in such cases, the Central Government has notified rules known as the National Highways (Manner of depositing the amount by the Central Government with the competent authority for acquisition of land) Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1998”), which statutorily requires the National Highways Authority to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation within seven days of determination made by the Arbitrator with the competent authority.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that inspite of the aforesaid statutory provisions and inspite of an award been passed by the Arbitrator in favour of the petitioners, the respondent National Highway Authority or the Road Development Corporation, as the case may be, has not disbursed the amount awarded to the petitioners who still await the amount inspite of the fact that their lands have been taken away by the authorities for the purposes of widening of the Highways and construction thereon has also been made by them.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in such circumstances, the respondent authorities be directed to immediately disburse the amount of compensation to the petitioners.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the National Highways Authority and the M.P. Road Development Corporation per contra submit that in all these cases, the amount required to be deposited by them with the competent authority prior to taking up acquisition proceedings, has already been deposited by them. It is submitted that in some cases, like the ones that have come up before this Court, the amount determined by the competent authority has been enhanced by the Arbitrator. It is submitted that in such cases, the Arbitrator is empowered to award interest @ 9% per annum on the enhanced amount to the claimants from the date of taking over possession under section 3D of the Act of 1956 till the date of actual deposit of the amount. It is submitted that in some cases, the petitioners have forcefully retained possession inspite of the amount being deposited and awards being passed.
9. It is further submitted that the amount has infact got to be disbursed by the competent authority and not by the National Highways Authority or the Road Development Corporation and is also subject to further proceedings being taken up by the NHAI or the Road Development Corporation against the award passed by the Arbitrator before the competent forum under sections 33 and 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19
