Acquisition of land under the National Highways Act results in absolute vesting with the Central Government, rendering any subsequent sale or claim of ownership by private parties void and subject to eviction proceedings.

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the National Highways Authority of India asking the petitioner to vacate the National Highways property is under challenge.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that patta stood in the name of the vendor to the petitioner, and subsequently, the name was transferred to the name of the petitioner. Therefore, petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property. Thus, impugned order passed by the National Highways Authority of India is infirm and to be set aside.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the National Highways Authority of India would submit that the subject lands Varadharajapuram Village, Poonamalle Taluk, Tiruvallur District for widening of Poonamalle-Walajahpet Section, NH-48, (Old NH No.4) was acquired by invoking the provisions of the National Highways Act. The procedures as contemplated under the Act was followed and the lands were acquired in the year 2005. The award was passed in the year 2006 and National Highways Authority of India is the absolute owner of the property. She would further submit that the compensation determined in the award has already been deposited before the competent authority.

4. Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition) Highways (Schemes)/State Authority also filed a counter revealing the said fact regarding the acquisition of land by the NHAI to implement the National Highways Road Project. Paragraphs No.12, 13 and 14 of the counter affidavit reveal the fact regarding the acquisition made by the National Highways Officer and reads as under, “12. It is respectfully submitted that it is seen from the report dated 02.11.2022 of the Tahsildar, Poonamalle, after the conclusion of the acquisition proceedings in 2005 and even after passing the Award for payment of compensation, the said Murugesa Pandian (who purchased from Venugopal Pillai) had executed a sale deed on 12.09.2012 in favour of the Petitioner/Paul Pandian vide D.No.2706/2012 to the extent of 375 Sq.ft out of 875 Sq.ft of land after the acquisition proceedings of the said lands under the NH Act, 1956 had already been completed. It is relevant to submit that the Tahsildar in his report dated 02.11.2022 has stated that the said Murugesa Pandian, the previous land owner, has sold the land to the Writ Petitioner by suppressing the fact of acquisition of the land by the NHAI as per the National Highways 1956 Act. The Tahsildar, Poonamallee has stated that the following transactions have taken place in respect of the land in Sy.No.413/15 involved in the acquisition of land under NH Act, 1956.

Old New Sy.No Vendor Purchaser Doc.No Area Sy.No. (Sq.ft)

197/1A 413/15 Venugopal Murugesa 1304/1996 825 Pillai Pandian

197/1A 413/15 Murugesa Paul 2706/2012 375 Pandian Pandian

13. It is respectfully submitted that however, the fact remains that the subject matter of the land for which the patta was obtained, has already acquired by the National Highways. In the event, the land purchased by the petitioner from Murugesa Pandian had already become absolutely vested with the Central Government from 12.07.2005 being the date of publication of 3-D(1) notification in the Central Government Gazette under NH Act, 1956. Therefore, the sale deed executed by the vendor in favour of the Writ Petitioner is illegal and against the provisions of NH Act, 1956 and the Petitioner cannot seek any remedy or relief from the Respondent. Under the above circumstances, the petitioner and his venders have no right whatsoever to claim any right over the acquired lands. Therefore, any construction madeby the petitioner in the land already vested