Authorities under the National Highways Act are not required to consider objections submitted prior to formal notification when objections are not filed within the prescribed timeframe.

1. The petitioners, owners of the properties in Survey No. 4/2A1, measuring 3150 Sq.Mt., and Survey No. 4/1B2, measuring 7899 Sq.Mt., respectively, situated in Nayakannur Village, Uthangarai Taluk, Krishnagiri District, has challenged the Gazette Notification No. 1844, dated 18.09.2012, issued under S.3 - A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the subsequent Gazette Notification No. 1259, dated 04.06.2013, issued under S.3 - D of the Act.

2. In the supporting affidavits, the petitioners have contended that the National Highways Authority of India, have decided to acquire the lands, for formation of National Highways from Tindivanam to Krishnagiri and issued Notification under S.3 - A of the Act, on 18.09.2012. It is the case of the petitioners that even prior to the issuance of the notification, the petitioners and other land owners, have submitted a letter, dated 18.04.2011, to the Competent Authority and the District Revenue officer, NH - 7, 46, 47 and 66, Salem & Krishnagiri, National Highways Authority of India, Krishnagiri, 2nd respondent herein, and that the petitioners have also sent a letter, dated 16.04.2012, objecting to the acquisition of the lands. But, without considering the objections, the Special Tahsildar (LA), National Highways 66, Scheme - 1, Uthangarai, 3rd respondent, has issued summons to the petitioners to participate in the enquiry, vide proceedings in Na.Ka.01/2010 (Alagu - 1), dated 04.09.2013. When the petitioners and the other villagers, questioned the action of respondents 2 and 3 herein, they were informed that a notification under S.3 - D of the Act, had already been issued and that therefore, question of considering the objections, does not arise.

3. Placing reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in R. Natarajan v. Union of India , reported in 2010 (6) CTC 337 , Mr. D. Ravichander, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents are bound to hear the petitioners, before issuing the notification under S.3 - D of the National Highways Act. Contending inter alia that there is a failure on the part of the authorities in adhering to the mandate, they have prayed to quash the abovesaid notifications.

4. The Project Director, NH - 66, National Highways Authority of India, Villupuram, 1st respondent herein, has filed a detailed counter - affidavit. Reiterating the same, Mr. S. Prasanna, learned counsel appearing to the 1st respondent submitted that the National Highways Authority of India has taken up the project of improving NH - 66 in the stretch from Tindivanam to Krishnagiri for rehabilitation, and up - gradation of 2 lane with paved shoulders configuration the stretch with bypasses for built up area of the towns. The Project Implementation Unit, Villupuram has been entrusted with the task of implementing the above project. The 2nd Respondent herein has been appointed as the Competent Authority for acquisition of private properties, required for formation of Bypass, realignment and widening the road NH - 66.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent further submitted that a detailed project report with the proposal for a wayside amenities, to an extent of 16650 sq.m., area in NH - 66, Nayakkanur Village, Uthangarai Taluk of Krishnagiri District, has been submitted. The Special District Revenue Officer / Competent Authority, Land Acquisition, Krishnagiri, has initiated action, under S.3 - A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 , notifying the required lands for acquisition. A notification under S.3 - A(1) was published in the Gazette of India No.