Madras High Court
V.Saravanan vs Union Of India on 23 August, 2021
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
and M.P.No.1 of 2011
V.Saravanan ... Appellant
-vs-
1. Union of India
rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Home, Transport & Highways,
New Delhi.
2. The Authorised Officer-cum-Special
District Revenue Officer,
National Highways No.68 (Acquisition),
Salem-636 004.
3. The Project Director,
National Highways Authority of India,
9/11, 2nd Floor,
Omalur Main Road,
Near New Bus Stand,
Salem-636 004.
4. Shanthi ... Respondents
(R4 deleted as per order dated 28.02.2011)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order of the learned Single Judge made in W.P.No.4568 of
2011 dated 30.08.2011.
For Appellant : Mr.T.V.Ramanujam,
Senior Counsel
for M/s.T.V.Krishnamachari
For R2 : Mr.T.Arun Kumar,
Government Advocate
For R3 : Mr.P.Wilson,
Senior Counsel
for M/s.Wilson Associates
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was pronounced by T.RAJA.J)
This Writ Appeal has been filed against the Common Order of
the learned Single Judge made in W.P.No.4568 of 2011 dated
30.08.2011.
2. The Writ Petition in W.P.No.4568/2011 has been filed
seeking to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the entire enquiry
proceedings conducted by the 2nd respondent, namely, the Authorized
Officer-cum-Special District Revenue Officer, National Highways No.68
(Acquisition), Salem, in respect of the proposed acquisition of the writ
petitioner/appellant's lands under the National Highways Act, 1956, is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
null and void for not following the directions of this Court issued in the
orders passed in W.P.No.13186/2009 and W.P.No.16679/2010 dated
25.01.2011. While so, the learned Single Judge in his order dated
30.08.2011 made in W.P.No.4568/2011 holding that the various
objections raised by the appellant that the compensation has not been
properly determined, can be canvassed before the arbitrator or in any
appropriate proceedings, dismissed the writ petition, however, giving
liberty to challenge the award.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant
submitted that the writ petition No.4568/2011 was filed on 22.02.2011
whereas the award was passed on 28.02.2011. He further submitted
that though the learned Single Judge declined to accept the relief
sought for by the appellant, however, liberty has been granted to
pursue his remedies before the Arbitrator. Therefore, the appellant
may be given liberty to pursue his objections before the arbitrator in
respect of the enhanced compensation only.
4. Per contra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 3rd
respondent stated that the appellant has admittedly received the
determined compensation. However, with regard to the enhanced
compensation, he sought for liberty from this Court to approach the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
arbitrator. But it is not known how he can pursue the remedy in view
of the expressed limitation under Section 3G(6) of the National
Highways Act, 1956. He also stated that since the appellant has
already given up their challenge to the land acquisition proceedings, in
order to get only the enhanced compensation, he has to work out his
remedy in the manner known to law.
5. We are also fully agree that when the writ petition was
filed on 22.02.2011 seeking to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring
that the entire enquiry proceedings initiated by the 2nd respondent in
respect of the proposed acquisition of the appellant's lands under the
National Highways Act, 1956 is null and void for not following the
directions of this Court passed in W.P.No.13186/2009 and
W.P.No.16679/2010 dated 25.01.2011, the learned Single Judge by
his order dated 30.08.2011, while declining to grant the relief has
given liberty to the appellant herein to pursue his objections. Since it is
now reported that the appellant has also fairly given up his challenge
to the land acquisition proceedings and he has also received the
determined compensation, we do not find any impediment on the part
of the appellant asking for enhanced compensation as per law.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
6. At this stage, learned Government Advocate appearing for
the 2nd respondent submitted that though the appellant has given all
opportunities to pursue his claim for enhanced compensation, it
appears that he has not chosen to do so in view of the period of
limitation.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more
particularly, the fact that the writ petition was filed before this Court
on 22.02.2011 whereas the award was passed on 28.02.2011 and now
the appellant wants to pursue only for enhanced compensation, 4
weeks time is granted to initiate the arbitration proceedings and if any
such arbitration proceedings are initiated within four weeks from the
date of receipt of this order, the arbitrator shall consider the exclusion
of the limitation period as the writ proceedings have been pending
before us.
8. With the above observation and direction, the Writ Appeal
is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petition is also closed.
(T.R.J.,) (T.V.T.S.J.,)
23.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
tsi
T.RAJA, J.
and
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
tsi
To
1. The Secretary,
Union of India,
Ministry of Home, Transport & Highways,
New Delhi.
2. The Authorised Officer-cum-Special
District Revenue Officer,
National Highways No.68 (Acquisition),
Salem-636 004.
3. The Project Director,
National Highways Authority of India,
9/11, 2nd Floor,
Omalur Main Road,
Near New Bus Stand,
Salem-636 004.
W.A.No.1837 of 2011
23.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
