Madras High Court
A.Sankar vs The District Collector on 14 June, 2022
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
A.Sankar .. Appellant in
W.A.No.1410/2022
S.Balaraman .. Appellant in
W.A.No.1363/2022
A.David .. Appellant in
W.A.No.1364/2022
H.D.Bose @ Danisukumar .. Appellant in
W.A.No.1412/2022
V.Selvakani .. Appellant in
W.A.No.1414/2022
Vs
1.The District Collector,
Chengalpattu District,
Chengalpattu-603 001.
____________
Page 1 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
2.The Special District Revenue Office,
Land Acquisition,
Highways, Metropolitan Wing,
Alandur, Chennai-600 016.
3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Highways),
Construction and Maintenance,
Tambaram, Chennai - 600 042. .. Respondents
Prayer: Appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
common order dated 05.01.2022 in W.P.Nos.28361, 28331, 28364,
28354 and 28374 of 2021
For the Appellants : Mr.V.Raghavachari
For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar
State Government Pleader
assisted by
Mr.K.M.D.Mugilan
Government Advocate
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
These writ appeals have been filed to challenge the judgment
and order dated 05.01.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge
dismissing the writ petitions to challenge the notice issued under
Section 19(5) and 19(7) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 [for
brevity, "the Act of 2001"].
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that without
acquisition of the land, notices under Section 19(5) and 19(7) of the
Act of 2001 were given. It is in ignorance of the fact that earlier also a
notice was issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
in the year 1976 and published in the official Gazette on 11.02.1976,
followed by a declaration under Section 6 on 07.02.1979. A challenge
to it was made by a batch of writ petitions led by W.P.No.8131 of
1986. Those writ petitions were allowed, thereby the acquisition
proceedings initiated by the respondents was set aside.
3. It is submitted that the respondents caused a notice on
26.2.2016 for eviction under the caption of encroachment and illegal
occupation of the land. A challenge to the said notice was made
before this Court and the writ petition was disposed of by treating the
said notice to be a show cause notice. Thus, a direction was issued to
the appellants to submit their objections within a period of two weeks.
The appellants then submitted their objections and thereupon the
respondents caused a public notice on 23.11.2016 invoking Section
15(2) of the Act of 2001 calling for objections and the appellants
submitted their objections. However, a notification under Section 15(1)
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
of the Act of 2001 was published, followed by a notice under Sections
19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001.
4. Learned counsel further submitted that notice under Sections
19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001 was issued without acquisition
proceedings and, therefore, the same is illegal. Objection to the notice
was given by the appellants, but the respondents have failed to
consider the same and during pendency of the writ petitions, an award
was passed on 31.03.2021.
5. The argument of learned counsel for the appellants is even in
reference to Section 8 of the Act of 2021 which is to be complied
before acquisition by invoking Sections 15(1) and 15(2) of the Act of
2001. In the instant case, notice under Section 15(2), followed by a
notice under Section 15(1) was issued without undertaking the
exercise to be undertaken under Section 8 of the Act of 2001. Section
8 of the Act of 2001 gives power to the respondents to fix highway
boundary, building line or control line etc. In the instant case, without
fixing the boundary of the highway, notice under Section 15(2) was
issued inviting objection and, in fact, it was submitted. But ignoring
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
the aforesaid, notice under Section 15(1), followed by notice under
Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001 was given. To support the
argument, a reference of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case
of Sannarangappa v. State of Karnataka and others, (2017) 12
SCC 797 has been given. A specific reference of paragraphs (5) and
(8) of the said judgment was given to show that before initiation of the
acquisition proceedings the exercise given under Section 8 of the Act
of 2001 is mandatory. It is also held that even if the issue aforesaid
was not taken before the High Court, that can be allowed to be taken
before the Apex Court. Thus, even if the appellants have not taken
the issue aforesaid before the learned Single Judge, they are at liberty
to take the issue in the appeals. Since the issue aforesaid goes to the
root of the case and the boundary of the highway was not fixed as per
Section 8 of the Act of 2001, the subsequent proceedings under
Sections 15(2) and 15(1) of the Act of 2001 is vitiated.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants has given further reference
of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Project Director,
Project Implementation Unit v. P.V.Krishnamoorthy and others,
(2021) 3 SCC 572. Paragraphs (56) to (62) of the said judgment,
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
apart from other paragraphs are referred to strengthen the arguments
raised for challenge to the notice issued under Sections 19(5) and
19(7) of the Act of 2001. The prayer is to set aside the notice under
Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001 and also the judgment
and order of the learned Single Judge.
7. Learned Government Pleader opposed the appeals and
submitted that an award, after notice under Sections 19(5) and 19(7)
of the Act of 2001, has already been passed determining the
compensation. The said award has not been challenged and he has
also produced photographs of the existing highway to show
obstructions on the highway on account of the land occupied by the
appellants. The photograph of the existing road would be enclosed
along with this judgment to have a clear picture of the area under
acquisition.
8. Learned Government Pleader further submitted that notice
under Section 15(1) of the Act of 2001 was issued after issuance of
notice under Section 15(2) to invite objections. The appellants have
submitted their objections to the notice issued under Section 15(2) of
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
the Act of 2001 and finding no substance in the objections, notice
under Section 15(1) of the Act of 2001 was issued. No challenge to
the notice under Section 15(1) of the Act of 2001 was made and in
view of the above, to determine the compensation notice under
Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001 was issued. Objection to
the aforesaid notice was given and taking into consideration the
objection, an award was passed on 31.03.2021, which is not under
challenge.
9. Learned Government Pleader submits that the exercise given
under Section 8 of the Act of 2001 is required as and when a new
highway is to be carved out and for marking of highway boundary and
building line etc. The case on hand is not carving of any new highway,
but to strengthen the existing highway, as in a very small part, due to
the occupation of the land by the appellants, the highway is not broad
enough, which may otherwise invite even accidents because the road
is passing through thickly populated area which is borne out by the
photographs and the map produced. He further submits that the
appellants have not challenged the notice issued under Section 15(2)
or Section 15(1) of the Act of 2001 on the ground that the acquisition
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
of the land is vitiated in the absence of the exercise given under
Section 8 of the Act of 2001. The argument aforesaid is otherwise
factual in nature, because as and when a highway is carved out it is
only after issuing notice and seeking objection thereto. It is not that a
new highway has been carved out, but the existing highway for many
years. Thus, the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of
Sannarangappa (supra) is not applicable and otherwise the appeal
therein was dismissed by the Apex Court despite the dismissal of the
writ petition for acquisition of the land for highways. Thus, a prayer is
made to dismiss the appeals.
10. We have considered the rival submissions and also scanned
the matter carefully.
11. The writ petitions were filed by the appellants to challenge
the notice issued under Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001.
For ready reference, Section 19 of the Act of 2001 is quoted
hereunder:
"19. Determination of amount.- (1) Where any land
is acquired by the Government under this Act, the
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
Government shall pay an amount for such acquisition,
which shall be determined in accordance with the
provisions of this section.
(2) Where the amount has been determined by
agreement between the Government and the person to
whom the amount has to be paid, it shall be paid in
accordance with such agreement.
(3) Where no such agreement can be reached, the
Government shall refer the case to the Collector for
determination of the amount to be paid for such
acquisition as also the person or persons to whom such
amount shall be paid:
Provided that no amount exceeding such
amount as the Government may, by general or
special order, specify, to be paid for such
acquisition shall be determined by the
Collector without the previous approval of the
Government or such officer as the Government
may appoint in this behalf.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section
(3), after the case is referred to the Collector under
that sub-section, but before he has finally determined
the amount, if the amount is determined by agreement
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
between the Government and the person to whom the
amount has to be paid, such amount shall be paid by
the Collector in accordance with such agreement.
(5) Before finally determining the amount, the
Collector shall give an opportunity to every
person to whom the amount has to be paid to
state his case as to the amount.
(6) In determining the amount, the collector shall be
guided by the provisions contained in Sections 23 and
24 and other relevant provisions of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act I of 1894), subject
to modification that in the said Sections 23 and 24, the
references to the date of publication of the notification
under sub-section (1) of Section 4 and the date of
publication of the declaration under Section 6 of the
said Act shall be construed as references to the date of
publication of notice under sub-sections (2) and (1),
respectively of Section 15 of this Act.
(7) For the purpose of determining the amount-
(a) the Collector shall have power to
require any person to deliver to him such
returns and assessments as be considers
necessary;
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
(b) the Collector shall also have power to
require any person known or believed to
be interested in the land to deliver to him
a statement containing as far as may be
practicable, the name of every other
person interested in the land as co-owner,
mortgagee, tenant or otherwise, and the
nature of such interest, and of the rents
and profits, If any, received or receivable
on account thereof for three years next
preceding the date of the statement.
(8) Every person required to deliver a return,
assessment or statement under sub-section (7) shall
be deemed to be legally bound to do so within the
meaning of section 175 and section 176 of the Indian
Penal Code.
(9) The Collector may hear expert witnesses if it be
necessary to do so in any particular case.
(10) The Collector or any officer authorised by him in
this behalf shall be entitled to enter in and inspect any
land which is subject to proceedings ·before him.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
(11)The Collector shall dispose of every case referred
to him under sub-section (3) for determination of
amount as expeditiously as possible and in any case
within six months from the date of such reference.
(12) Where any case is referred to any Collector under
sub-section (3), the Government may, at any stage by
order, in writing and for reasons to be recorded
therein, transfer it to any other officer, and upon such
transfer, unless some special directions are given in
the order, the officer to whom the case is transferred,
may hear and dispose of the case from the stage at
which it was transferred or the case may be heard and
disposed of by him denovo."
12. Section 19 of the Act of 2001 pertains to determination of
compensation for acquisition of the land. A detailed process has been
given for that purpose and the exercise given therein is to be taken
only after completion of the process for acquisition of land given under
Section 15 of the Act of 2001. Section 15 of the Act of 2001 is also
quoted hereunder for ready reference:
"15. Power to acquire land.- (1) If the Government
are satisfied that any land is required for the purpose
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
of acquire land. any highway or for construction of
bridges, culverts, causeways or other structures
thereon or for any purpose incidental or ancillary
thereto, in furtherance of the objects of this Act, they
may acquire such land by publishing in the Tamil Nadu
Government Gazette a notice specifying the description
of such land and the particular purpose for which such
land is required.
(2) Before publishing a notice under sub-section (1),
the Government shall call upon the owner and any
other person having interest in such land to show
cause within such time as may be specified in the
notice, why the land should not be acquired. The
Government shall also cause a public notice to be
given in such manner as may be prescribed.
(3) The Government may, after considering the cause,
if any, shown by the owner or other person having
interest on such land, pass such an order under sub-
section (1), as they may deem fit."
13. The documents on record show that before publication of the
notice under Section 15(1) of the Act of 2001, a notice under Section
15(2) of the Act of 2001 was issued by the respondents and pursuant
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
to which, even the appellants have responded and submitted their
objections. After considering the objections, notice under Section
15(1) of the Act of 2001 was issued by the respondents finding that
the land is required for the purpose of highways. Section 15(1) of the
Act can be invoked not only for the highways, but even for the
acquisition of land for construction of bridges, culverts, causeways or
other structures thereon or for any purpose incidental or ancillary
thereto, in furtherance of the objects of the Act.
14. After issuance of the notice under Section 15(1) of the Act of
2001, no challenge to it was made by the appellants and it was so
published in the year 2018. In view of the above, the process required
for acquisition of the land was completed by the respondents and,
therefore, there are documents to show that the acquisition is by
undertaking the exercise given under Section 19 of the Act of 2001.
Accordingly, notice under Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001
was issued and no objection in that regard determining the
compensation was raised other than to give a brief history of the
litigation. The challenge to the notice was not even on the ground that
prior to it, the exercise given under Section 8 of the Act of 2001 was
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
not undertaken. In any case, the learned Single Judge did not find any
illegality in the notice issued under Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act
of 2001 and, accordingly, dismissed the writ petitions. We do not find
any error in the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge.
15. The issue raised before this Court for the first time is in
reference to Section 8 of the Act of 2001. Section 8 of the Act of 2001
is quoted hereunder:
"8. Power to fix highway boundary, building line,
control line, etc. (1) The Highways authority of any
division may, by notification, in relation to any highway
or any area in that division, where the construction or
development of a highway is undertaken or proposed
to be undertaken, fix -
(a) the highway boundary, building line, or
control line; or
(b) the highway boundary and the building
line; and
(c) the building line and the control line:
Provided that before the publication of the notification
under this sub-section, a draft of the said notification
shall be published inviting objections, if any, on the
proposed fixation.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
(2) The draft of the notification under sub-section (1)
shall contain -
(a) all details of lands situated between the
highway boundary line and control line
proposed to be fixed and in the case of new
works, the lands and persons benefited by the
construction or development of such highway,
and;
(b) notice requiring all persons likely to be
affected by such notification, to make their
objections or suggestions, if any, in writing,
with respect to the issue of such a notification,
to the Highways authority within such period
as may be prescribed.
(3) After considering the representation. If any,
received under sub-section (2), the Highways authority
may, with the approval of the State Highways
Authority-
(i) drop the proposal to fix the highway
boundary, the building line or the control line;
or
(ii) publish the final notification under sub-
section (1) with such modifications as may be
considered necessary.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections
(1), (2) and (3), the Government may, in consultation
with the State Highways Authority, having regard to
the situation or the requirements of any highway or the
condition of the area through which such highway
passes, -
(a) fix different building line and control line
for such highway; or
(b) refrain from fixing the building line or
control line for such highway or portion
thereof."
16. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that without
following the procedure contemplated under Section 8 of the Act of
2001, the respondents are not authorised to undertake the process for
acquisition of the land. A reference of the judgment of the Apex Court
in the case of Sannarangappa (supra) has been given in support of
the argument.
17. In the instant case, we do not find any challenge to the
notice issued under Section 15(2) or Section 15(1) of the Act of 2001,
thereby the acquisition was undertaken and completed by the
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
respondents without objection. It was not challenged even while
maintaining the writ petitions on hand. Therefore, so far as the notice
issued under Section 15(1) is concerned, the same is after causing
notice under Section 15(2) of the Act of 2001. In the light of the
aforesaid and in the absence of a challenge to the acquisition of the
land, the issue in reference to Section 8 of the Act of 2001 cannot be
taken up. In any case, for clarity, we are considering the aforesaid
also in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of
Sannarangappa (supra).
18. Learned Government Pleader has clarified that it is not that a
new highway is carved out, but is an existing highway, meaning
thereby it was only notified with boundary. The aforesaid otherwise
remains factual issue and was not taken up by the appellants. In any
case, to deal with the said argument, we are required to refer Section
15(1) of the Act of 2001, which is not only a provision for acquisition of
the land for highways, but for construction of bridges, culverts,
causeways and other structures. The provision aforesaid does not
provide that exercise therein can be undertaken only after completion
of the exercise given under Section 8 of the Act of 2001.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
19. This Court has power to alter the provision enacted by the
legislature, though it has power to declare a provision as ultra vires on
its challenge, if it is found to be unconstitutional or suffers from any
illegality. In the case on hand, when the highway is already existing,
as is coming out from the photographs, then the process for
acquisition of a part of the land which is obstructing the existing
highway given under Section 8 of the Act was not required to be
undertaken for giving effect to the acquisition, by undertaking the
process given under Section 15(1) or Section 15(2) of the Act of 2001.
Therefore, the judgment of the Apex court in the case of
Sannarangappa (supra) would be of no help to the appellants even if
the issue aforesaid can be allowed to be taken at the stage of appeal.
20. We further find that the issue before the Apex Court was on
a judgment of the Karnataka High Court where a challenge was made
to Section 15 of the Karnataka Highways Act, 1964. The writ petition
therein was dismissed by the Karnataka High Court, thus, an appeal
was preferred. The issue before the High Court was not in reference
to non-compliance of the provision of the Act of 1964 before
acquisition of the land. The discussion of the argument was made in
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
regard to the challenge to Section 15 of the Act of 1964 and therein
certain observations were made. But the Apex Court dismissed the
appeal and even no interference in the acquisition was made. The
aforesaid would become clear from paragraph (8) of the judgment in
the case of Sannarangappa (supra). The process for acquisition was
completed therein followed by determination of compensation, as
referred by the Apex Court in the said judgment.
21. In view of the above, we do not find any force in the
argument raised by learned counsel for the appellants in reference to
Section 8 of the Act of 2001 and now the position is that after issuance
of notice under Sections 19(5) and 19(7) of the Act of 2001 to
determine the compensation, an award has already been passed on
31.03.2021. A challenge to the award does not exist and otherwise
we have dealt with all the issues raised before us and finding no merit
therein, the appeals fail not only qua the challenge to the judgment
and order of the learned Single Judge, but also in reference to the
arguments raised for the first time before us and, accordingly, the
batch of appeals are dismissed.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
22. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently,
C.M.P.Nos.9056, 8727, 8728, 9040 and 9050 of 2022 are closed.
23. The photograph of the existing road has been submitted by
learned Government Pleader and, for clarity, the same is annexed
along with this judgment.
(M.N.B., CJ) (N.M., J.)
14.06.2022
Index : Yes/No
bbr
To:
1.The District Collector,
Chengalpattu District,
Chengalpattu-603 001.
2.The Special District Revenue Office,
Land Acquisition,
Highways, Metropolitan Wing,
Alandur, Chennai-600 016.
3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Highways),
Construction and Maintenance,
Tambaram, Chennai - 600 042.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
N.MALA, J.
bbr
W.A.Nos.1410, 1363, 1364, 1412 and 1414 of 2022
14.06.2022
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
