Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Maddula Pedda Venkata Reddy vs National Highways Authority Of ... on 14 December, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
****
W.P. No.22599 of 2020
Between:
Maddula Pedda Venkata Reddy, S/o Chenna Reddy,
Hindu, Aged about 73 years, Ex-Surpanch,
R/o D.No.4-19, Pusalapadu Village,
Besthavaripet Mandal, Prakasam District and two others.
. .... Petitioner
AND
National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by its Secretary to Govt. of India,
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Plot No.G-5 & 6, Sector - 10,
Dwaraka, New Delhi - 110 075 and four others
.... Respondents
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 14.12.2021
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers
may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes / No
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be
marked to Law Reporters / Journals? Yes / No
3. Whether His Lordship wish to
see the fair copy of the Judgment? Yes / No
_________________________
U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
2 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
+ W.P. No.22599 of 2020
% 14.12.2021
Between:
Maddula Pedda Venkata Reddy, S/o Chenna Reddy,
Hindu, Aged about 73 years, Ex-Surpanch,
R/o D.No.4-19, Pusalapadu Village,
Besthavaripet Mandal, Prakasam District and two others.
.... Petitioners
AND
National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by its Secretary to Govt. of India,
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Plot No.G-5 & 6, Sector - 10,
Dwaraka, New Delhi - 110 075 and four others
.... Respondents
! Counsel for Petitioners : Ms. Narasimha Rao Gudiseva
^ Counsel for Respondents : Standing Counsel for National Highways
< Gist:
> Head Note:
3 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASADA RAO
Writ Petition 22599 of 2020
ORDER:
The petitioners implore for Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of
the respondents, in changing the name of Pusalapadu Toll Plaza (user fee)
into Pandillapalli Toll Plaza (user fee) on the Guntur and Anantapur
National Highway No.544-D situated in Survey No.910 of Pusalapadu
village, Bestavaripeta Mandal, Prakasam District, is highly illegal, irregular,
arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and also contrary to the
rules and regulations of National Highway Authority of India (for short
"NHAI") and consequently to direct the respondents to restore the name of
the Toll Plaza to Pusalapadu Toll Plaza.
2. The petitioners' case succinctly is thus:
(a) The 1st petitioner is Ex-Surpanch, the 2nd petitioner is Ex-M.P.T.C.
and the 3rd petitioner is Ex-Ward Member of Pusalapadu village. Their plea
is that NHAI laid National Highway from Guntur to Anantapur through their
village. While road laying was under progress, the respondents have
assigned highway number as "544-D" to the aforesaid Guntur-Anantapur
highway. While so, the respondents proposed to construct Toll Plaza at
km.231.500 in Prakasam District for the section from km.212.983 to
km.269.381 (Giddaluru to Vinukonda section) of National Highway 544-D,
which is situated in survey Number 910 of Pusalapadu village, Bestavaripeta
Mandal of Prakasam District. Accordingly, the respondents have constructed
4 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
Toll Plaza in Survey Number 910 and named the said Toll Plaza as
"Pusalapadu Toll Plaza". The said Toll Plaza, thus, located within the limits
of Pusalapadu village.
(b) While so, due to political pressures, the NHAI has changed the
name of Pusalapadu Toll Plaza to "Pandillapalli Toll Plaza" without there
being any justification. Pandillapalli village is far off from subject Toll Plaza
and lands of the said village were not even utilized for laying highway or for
construction of the Toll Plaza. On the contrary, the villagers of Pusalapadu
village have voluntarily surrendered their lands, free of cost, for forming
National Highway. Therefore, the respondents-Authorities are not justified
in changing the name of the Toll Plaza.
(c) The petitioners and their villagers made representations on
dt.16.11.2020 to the Respondents to restore the original name to the Toll
Plaza by considering sentiments of the villagers, however, there was no
fruitful result, hence the Writ Petition.
3. The 4th Respondent filed counter opposing writ petition, inter alia,
contending as follows:
(a) The NHAI has taken up development of the 2nd lane stretch from
Giddaluru to Vinukonda Section of NH-544D to 2nd lane with paved
shoulders. As a part of the project, Toll Plazas are also constructed for
collection of Toll from the users of National Highway road. In that process,
a Toll Plaza was constructed at km.231.500 in Pusalapadu village,
Bestavaripeta Mandal of Prakasam District. While so, in the check-list for
5 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
publication of toll fee notification, the name of the village where the Toll
Plaza is located has to be indicated. As a general practice, the Toll Plaza is
named after the revenue village in which the Toll Plaza is located. Initially,
the Toll Plaza at km.231.519 was named as Pusalapadu Toll Plaza being
located in Pusalapadu revenue village. Accordingly, the draft toll
notification was submitted by the Project Implementation Unit and Regional
Office to NHAI headquarters, New Delhi in the month of August, 2020 for
approval by competent Authority, Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways. While the notification was under process of scrutiny at NHAI,
New Delhi, certain representations from the public and also from the
Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha), Ongole Parliamentary constituency
were received requesting to change the name of Toll Plaza as "Pandillapalli"
i.e. the village, where the Toll Plaza is located, instead of "Pusalapadu". In
reply, the NHAI, New Delhi, vide letter dt.03.09.2020 informed that it being
a public funded plaza and as fee notification is yet to be published, there
may not be any objection to the proposed change in the name of Toll Plaza
as the draft fee notification is still under process and the same may be
processed accordingly. Therefore, the draft notification was again processed
with the revised Toll Plaza name as "Pandillapalli" and sent for approval of
competent Authority, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Government of India. The revised toll notification now stands approved by
the competent Authority and is in the stage of formal Gazette notification.
(b) The petitioners have no right vested to challenge the change of
name of the Toll Plaza as there is no violation of any rule and prerogative
6 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
power of the competent Authority to publish a toll plaza name in the Gazette
for collection of toll fee. The name of the Toll Plaza is nothing but an
administrative convenience of the NHAI, hence the Writ Petition may be
dismissed.
4. The 5th respondent, who is Ex-Surpanch of Pandillapalli Gram
Panchayat sought to be impleaded as Respondent No.5 in the Writ Petition
vide I.A.1/2020 and the said petition was allowed. The averments made in
the implead petition were sought to be treated as counter of the 5th
Respondent. His version is that the subject Toll Plaza is located at Chainage
and the Pandillapalli village is hamlet located at one kilometer from the
main carriage way on RHS of the project highway and the access road
leading to Pandillapalli village is located at 232+030 RHS. The said Toll
Plaza was constructed by demolishing the old bus shelter of Pandillapalli bus
stop in Survey No.910 of Pusalapadu revenue village and the said survey
Number 910 is located under the limits of Pandillapalli Gram Panchayat
limits. Therefore, it can be said that the subject Toll Plaza is situated within
the limits of Pandillapalli Gram Panchayat. It is submitted that the Toll Plaza
at km.231.500 is located in Pusalapadu revenue village of Bestavaripeta
Mandal and it can be said that Pusalapadu is far away from the Toll Plaza.
Earlier the National Highway Authorities considered the name of revenue
village for naming the location of a toll plaza, however coming to know
about the same, a Grama Sabha was conducted under leadership of
K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Special Officer of Pandillapalli Gram Panchayat
regarding the change in the name of the Toll Plaza as Pandillapalli Toll
7 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
Plaza from Pusalapadu Toll Plaza. Accordingly, the Grama Sabha
unanimously accepted and passed a resolution to change the name of Toll
Plaza as "Pandillapalli Toll Plaza", thereafter the villagers of Pandillapalli
village made representation dt.07.08.2020 to NHAI requesting to change the
name of the Toll Plaza.
5. It is submitted that Highway was constructed by acquiring land in
Survey No.859/2 of Palnati Srinivasa Reddy and Prasanth Reddy and some
other villagers. Further the Village Revenue Officer has clearly stated that
the Toll Plaza was constructed in Survey No.859/2 along with other survey
numbers. As per Google maps, the distance between Pandillapalli Toll Plaza
and Pusalapadu is about 5.8 kilometers and the distance between
Pandillapalli Toll Plaza and Pandillapalli village is about one kilometer. So
considering all these facts, the name of the Toll Plaza was changed to
Pandillapalli Toll Plaza from Pusalapadu Toll Plaza, thus prayed to dismiss
the Writ Petition.
6. The Writ Petitioners filed reply affidavit denying the counter
averments of respondents 4 and 5.
7. Heard arguments of Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, learned counsel for
petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Central Government
representing respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue
representing respondent No.2 and Sri S.S. Varma, learned Standing Counsel
for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Sri P. Durga Prasad representing respondent
No.5.
8 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
8. Both the learned Counsel reiterated their pleadings in their respective
arguments. It is the contention of the petitioners that since the subject Toll
Plaza is located in the REVENUE village of Pusalapadu and as there was a
convention of NHAI to name a Toll Plaza after concerned revenue villages,
initially the subject Toll Plaza was correctly named after Pusalapadu village
as "Pusalapadu Toll Plaza". However, due to political pressure, the name
was changed as "Pandillapalli Toll Plaza" without there being any
justification.
9. In oppugnation, the contention of the respondents is that the Highway
No.544D was laid by acquiring lands in Pandillapalli village. Further, the
subject Toll Plaza was constructed by demolishing the bus shelter of
Pandillapalli village. Above all, the Toll Plaza is located nearer to
Pandillapalli village at a distance of one kilometer and it is far away from
Pusalapadu village at a distance of 5.8 kilometers. In that view, on the
representations of the villagers of Pandillapalli, the Toll Plaza's name was
rightly changed to Pandillapalli Toll Plaza.
10. The point for consideration is whether there are merits in the Writ
Petition to allow?
Point: The admitted facts are that originally the subject Toll Plaza was
named after Pusalapadu village as "Pusalapadu Toll Plaza" by following
general convention that toll plazas on the National Highways are being
named after the concerned revenue village, in which, the toll plaza is
located. However, subsequently, on the representations of the villagers of
9 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
Pandillapalli backed by local Member of Parliament, the NHAI had changed
the name of the Toll Plaza to "Pandillapalli Toll Plaza" on the ground that
the toll plaza is situated within the local limits of Gram Panchayat of
Pandillapalli and the Toll Plaza was constructed by demolishing the bus
shelter of Pandillapalli village bus stop. Further, part of the highway was
laid by acquiring the lands from the villagers of Pandillapalli village. In the
light of the above facts, I gave my anxious consideration to the above facts
and arguments. The notable point in this case is National Highway
Authorities have not laid down any rules or regulations specifying the
procedure to be followed for christening the Toll Plaza. This Court
instructed the learned Government Pleader (Revenue) representing the 2nd
Respondent to apprise to this Court whether there are any revenue Laws or
rules throwing light on the controversy. The learned Government Pleader
(Revenue), on verification and on instructions, had submitted that there was
neither Law nor practice or procedure prevailing in the Revenue Department
for naming Toll Plaza. Thus, it is pellucidly clear that there is no governing
statutory Law or rules to meet the present situation. Both the learned
Counsel admitted that by mere naming a Toll Plaza after a village will not
enable that village to claim for a portion of the income generated from that
Toll Plaza from the Contractor concerned or to claim from the NHAI to take
up developmental activities such as laying roads, improving the drainage
system, electrification etc., Therefore, there will be absolutely no financial
benefit to a village due to naming of Toll Plaza after it. In that view, the
petitioners cannot clamour that they have suffered violation of any right just
10 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
because by convention, the Highway Authorities used to name the Toll Plaza
after its revenue village, which they initially followed, but having found
more formidable request from the villagers of Pandillapalli village, they
changed the name of the Toll Plaza as Pandillapalli Toll Plaza. When no
semblance of right, much less, fundamental right is violated, this Court
cannot entertain the Writ Petition and therefore the Writ Petition is liable to
be dismissed.
11. However, before parting, the submissions of the learned Counsel for
the petitioners with sentimental tone need a mention. Sri Gudiseva
Narasimha Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, while admitting that
mere naming a Toll Plaza after petitioners' village will not enable them to
get any financial benefit, however, would submit that appearance of the
name of a small village on the broader rubric of a Toll Plaza of National
Highway is a gesture of honour to the concerned village, which should be
viewed with sentimental spectacles rather in terms of monetary benefit. He
concluded that keeping this aspect in view, the respondents-Authorities may
be directed to frame rules in the matter of naming highway Toll Plazas. I
find some force in the above submission. As already stated supra, though
there is no financial benefit nor infrastructural improvements available due
to naming a Toll Plaza after a particular village, however, appearance of a
hitherto an unknown village on the broader nameplates of the National
Highway Toll Plazas will generate inexplicable sense of honour among the
villagers and create pride to their village. It is a known fact that now-a-days,
highway toll plazas are known for hub of activities as restaurants, petrol
11 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
bunks and busy hawkers bustling around the Toll Plazas. Further, since the
name of an unknown village falls on the gaze of nationwide travelers on that
way, the historical, cultural, geographical and artistic importance of that
particular village may be propagated among the travelers, who make brief-
halts near the Toll Plazas. Having regard to these facts, in my considered
view, the respondents-Authorities are obligated to prepare concrete rules and
guidelines for naming highway Toll Plazas.
12. Accordingly, while dismissing the Writ Petition, the National
Highway Authority of India (NHAI) is directed to prepare concrete rules and
guidelines for naming National Highway Toll Plazas in consultation with the
respective State Governments expeditiously. No costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending for
consideration shall stand closed.
_________________________
U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
14.12.2021
krk
12 UDPR,J.
WP 22599/2020
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
W.P No.22599 of 2021
14th December, 2021
krk
