Back
2023 Supreme(MP) 72
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
S.A. Dharmadhikari and Prakash Chandra Gupta , JJ.
Indira Rana v. Competent Authority Land Acquisition Officer and others
Writ Petition No. 1375, of 2023, (I); Decided on 18.1.2023.
Ajay Kumar Mimrot and R.K. Trivedi for petitioner; Anand Soni, Additional Advocate General, for respondents/State.
Headnote:
Constitution of India -- Art. 226/227 -- National Highways Act, 1956 -- S. 3G (5) -- maintainability of writ petition -- availability of alternative remedy -- land acquisition -- quantum of compensation and non-consideration of immovable property/amenities constructed over land in question -- cannot be reconsidered and decided in writ proceedings -- petitioner at liberty to avail alternative statutory remedy. [Paras 3 & 4]
Òkjr dk lafoèkku & vuqPNsn 226@227 & jk"Vªh; jktekxZ vfèkfu;e] 1956 & èkkjk 3th ¼5½ & fjV ;kfpdk pykus ;ksX; gksuk & vkuqdfYid mipkj dh miyC/krk & Òwfe vtZu & çfrdj dk ifjek.k rFkk ç'uxr Òwfe ij lfUufeZr LFkkoj laifRr@lq[k&lqfoèkk ij fopkj ugha fd;k tkuk & fjV dk;Zokgh esa iqufoZpkj dj fofu'p; ugha fd;k tk ldrk & vkuqdfYid dkuwuh mipkj çkIr djus d¢ fy, ;kph Lora=A ¼iSjk 3 ,oa 4½
ORDER
1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
"(i) To allow this petition by issuing a writ of mandamus.
(ii) To quash/set aside the impugned award dated 15.9.2022 (annexure P-1) by remanding the matter to respondent No.1 to inspect the acquired land of the petitioner and the property/amenities situated on the land in presence of the petitioner and to pass a fresh award after proper evaluation of the properties including all benefits.
(iii) That, respondent No.1 be directed to award a proper compensation considering the date of notification dated 13.5.2021 and 11.3.2022.
(iv) Any other relief which this Court may deem fit in favour of the petitioner and in interest of justice."
2. Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that respondent No.1 and 2 raised a preliminary objection that this writ petition is not maintainable as efficacious remedy is available under the provisions of section 3G (5) of the National Highway Act, 1956. Learned counsel for the respondent also submits that a remedy is available to the petitioner to approach the arbitrator i.e. Collector, Dewas seeking redressal of grievance.
3. Admittedly, the grievance of the petitioner with regard to quantum of compensation and non-consideration of the immovable property/ amenities constructed over the land in question, cannot be considered and decided by this Court in writ proceedings. The grievance with regard to diverted commercial land, cannot be redressed in the writ proceedings.
4. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy available under the National Highway Act, 1956 as well as Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in accordance with law against the impugned award passed by the arbitrator.
5. With the aforesaid liberty, this writ petition stand disposed of.
