IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
A. ABHISHEK REDDY, J.
Smt. Rodda Suguna and Others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Telangana and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 11525 of 2021
Decided On : 28-03-2022
NH Act - Land Acquisition - S.O. No. 416(E) - S.O. No. 309(E) - NH-563 - Sections 3A, 3C, 3D, 3G - The court upheld the decision of the authorities to change the alignment of the road under the NH Act, citing the expertise of NHAI and the limited scope of judicial review in such matters. The court also emphasized the importance of public interest in land acquisition proceedings and the discretion of the courts in granting injunctions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to declare the changing of road alignment for land acquisition under the NH Act as illegal and arbitrary. They alleged mala-fide intention and political influence in the alignment changes. The respondents defended the decision, citing factors such as avoiding structures, reducing acquisition costs, and serving public interest.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the alignment change was in compliance with the NH Act and upheld the decision of the authorities. It rejected the petitioners' allegations due to lack of evidence and emphasized the expertise of NHAI in highway development.
Issues: The issues revolved around the legality and motives of the road alignment changes, as well as the compliance with the NH Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review in highway development matters, the importance of public interest in land acquisition, and the discretion of the courts in granting injunctions.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioners to file claim petitions within two weeks. Miscellaneous petitions were closed with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
1. Seeking to declare the action of respondent No. 2 in changing the alignment by issuing Gazette Notification dated 28.01.2021 in S.O. No. 416(E) issued under National Highways Act, 1956 (in short ‘NH Act’) published in ‘Namaste Telangana’ newspaper on 03.02.2021 for acquisition of land for the purpose of NH-563 from Kms. No. 26.32 to Kms 83.3 (Karimnagar) in the District of Karimnagar, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to adopt the 1st alignment in Notification in S.O. No. 309(E) dated 19.01.2018 for acquisition of land for the purpose of NH-563 in Karimnagar District, the present Writ Petition is filed.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition for respondent Nos. 1 and 4, Sri. Alishetty Laxminarayana, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 2 and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No. 3.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the official respondents with a mala-fide intention have changed the alienation twice under the influence of some vested persons who are having political influence. Learned counsel has stated that initially a notification was issued on 19.01.2018 and as no award was passed, the same has lapsed. In the notification dated 19.01.2018, the road was passing through government lands and only few private lands were getting affected due to laying of the road. But, after the lapsing of the notification, dated 19.01.2018, the officials have issued another notification dated 05.06.2020 by changing the alignment of the road, from the earlier notified one on 19.01.2018. He has further stated that the second notification was published in ‘Mana Telangana’ news paper, which does not have any circulation and therefore the petitioners did not have any knowledge about the issuance of the notification, dated 05.06.2020. Even the notification dated 05.06.2020 has also lapsed as no award was passed within the time stipulated under the NH Act. Thereafter, the impugned notification is issued on 28.01.2021 wherein the alignment of the road was yet again changed and the said notification was published in ‘Namaste Telangana’ newspaper. Learned counsel has also stated that acquisition sought under second and third (impugned) notifications will be Acs. 27-04 guntas more than the acquisition sought in the first notification, dated 19.01.2018. As per the alignment in the first notification, Munjampally, Annaram, Manakonduru, Bomakal and Durshed Villages will be affected to the extent of Acs. 161-00 guntas, which include government lands to an extent of Acs. 12-00 in Manakonduru Village, Acs. 0-28 guntas in Bomkal Village and Ac. 1-33 guntas in Durshed Village. But, as per the new alignment, Munjampally, Annaram, Manakonduru, Bomakal and Durshed Villages will be affected to the extent of Acs. 187-00 guntas and the distance would be increased to 3.5 kms. Learned counsel has further stated that the alignment of the road was changed at the behest of some vested interested persons whose lands were getting affected in the earlier notifications and therefore the impugned notification is issued to help them. Learned counsel has further stated that the distance under the present notification has increased by 1.8 kms and an area of Acs. 27.00 more has to be acquired. That the petitioners, who were the marginal farmers and oustees under an earlier project, were allotted the present lands and even these lands are also sought to be acquired under the present notification. Even though the petitioners have given several representations to the authorities concerned to stick to the original alignment of road, but they have not bothered to consider the same.
4. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for NHAI has stated that the authorities concerned duly taking into consideration the various factors and also the report of the Experts have changed the alignment of the road. That as per the earlier notificat
Akhil Bharat Goseva Sangh vs. State of A.P. (2006) 4 SCC 162
Bhagwan Das vs. State of Rajasthan
AI
The expertise of NHAI in highway development, the limited scope of judicial review in such matters, and the importance of public interest in land acquisition proceedings.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the court should be slow in interfering with decisions taken by experts in the context of land acquisition for national highways, and indi....
The court affirmed the validity of land acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act, emphasizing the expertise of the highway authority and limited scope for judicial review in technical ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.