Madras High Court
V.Ravichandara Raju vs The National Highways Authority ... on 23 March, 2022
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.03.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
M.P.No.1 of 2011
V.Ravichandara Raju ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The National Highways Authority of India,
Represented by its Project Officer,
Bhat Road, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai -16.
2.The Special District Revenue Officer (Land
Acquitiion) - cum - Competent Authority,
(under National Highways Act),
Kancheepuram & Tiruvellur District,
Office at Tahsildar Office,
Poonamallee, Chennai - 600 056.
3.The Aribitrator (National Highways)
and District Collector,
Tiruvellur District, Tiruvellur. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to determine and pay
compensation for petitioner's land in New S.No.179/8B2F2, Pethikuppam
Village, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvellore District of 264 Sq.mtrs, sought
to be acquired under National Highways Act, 1956 by applying the
principles contained in Common Judgment dated 04.03.2011 of this Hon'ble
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
Court in batch W.P.No.15699/2008 etc.
For petitioner : Mr.K.Venkatasubba Raju
For Respondents : Mr.Richardson wilson
(for R.1 & R.2)
Mr.P.Sathish (for R.3)
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition seeking direction to the
respondents to determine and pay compensation for petitioner's land in New
S.No.179/8B2F2, Pethikuppam Village, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvellore
District of 264 Sq.mtrs, sought to be acquired under the National Highways
Act, 1956 by applying the principles contained in Common Judgment dated
04.03.2011 of this Court in batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.15699 of 2008
etc.
2. Mr.P.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice
for the third respondent. In view of the limited relief sought for in this
petition and on the consent expressed by the learned counsel appearing on
either side, this petition is taken up for final disposal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the
property comprised in New Survey No.179/8B2F2, measuring an extent of
264 sq.ft, situated at Pethikuppam Village, Gummidipoondi Taluk,
Tiruvellore District. The above said property was acquired by the first
respondent for the purpose of formation of National Highways under Section
3-A and 3-G (3) & (4) of the National Highways Act. Thereafter, the
competent authority/National Highways passed award. Challenging the
award, for better compensation, the present Writ Petition has been filed by
the petitioner.
4. Though very many grounds have been raised, learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that, during the pendency of the writ petition, Sec.3-
J of the National Highways Act was challenged before different High Courts.
Ultimately, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and
another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others, reported in (2019) 9 SCC 304,
declared Section 3-J as ultra vires and petitioners are entitled to receive fair
compensation along with Solatium and interest payable under Sections
23(1)(a), 23(2) and the proviso to Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
1894. In view of the above, this Court may permit the petitioner to file
appropriate application before the District Collector/Arbitrator and the
District Collector may be directed to pass appropriate orders within a time
frame that may be fixed by this Court.
5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the National
Highways/respondents 1 & 2 submitted that this Court may permit the
National Highways Authority to raise all those contentions before the
Arbitrator/District Collector.
6.The facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the
petitioner is the land loser and he challenged the notice/award proceedings
before this Court. During the pendency of this writ petition, the Hon'ble
Apex Court declared Section 3-J of the National Highways Act as ultra vires,
in the case of Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others
reported in (2019) 9 SCC 304. The relevant portion of the above said
judgment is extracted hereunder:-
"52.There is no doubt that the learned Solicitor General,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
in the aforesaid two orders, has conceded the issue raised in
these cases. This assumes importance in view of the plea of Shri
Divan that the impugned judgments should be set aside on the
ground that when the arbitral awards did not provide for
solatium or interest, no Section 34 petition having been filed by
the landowners on this score, the Division Bench judgments
that are impugned before us ought not to have allowed
solatium and/or interest. Ordinarily, we would have acceded to
this plea, but given the fact that the Government itselt is of the
view that solatium and interest should be granted even in cases
that arise between 1997 and 2015, in the interest of justice we
decline to interfere with such orders, given our discretionary
jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. We
therefore, declare that the provisions of the Land Acquisition
Act relating to solatium and interest contained in Sections
23(1-1) and (2) and interest payable in terms of Section 28
proviso will apply to acquisitions made under the National
Highways Act. Consequently, the provision of Section 3-J is, to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
this extent, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India
and, therefore, declared to be unconstitutional. Accordingly,
appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.9599 of 2019 is dismissed."
7.In view of the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the
petitioner is directed to file appropriate application before the
Arbitrator/District Collector, in terms of Section 3G(v) of the National
Highways Act, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order. Thereafter, Arbitrator/District Collector is directed to pass
appropriate orders within a period of twelve weeks, liberty is granted to the
petitioner as well as the first and second respondents to raise all contentions
before the third respondent/District Collector in accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
23.03.2022
Index : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
Internet : Yes / No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
tri/nhs
To
1.The National Highways Authority of India,
Represented by its Project Officer,
Bhat Road, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai -16.
2.The Special District Revenue Officer (Land
Acquitiion) - cum - Competent Authority,
(under National Highways Act),
Kancheepuram & Tiruvellur District,
Office at Tahsildar Office,
Poonamallee, Chennai - 600 056.
3.The Aribitrator (National Highways)
and District Collector,
Tiruvellur District, Tiruvellur.
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
tri/nhs
W.P.No.21927 of 2011
M.P.1 of 2011
23.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
