Madras High Court
U.Shamima vs The Secretary To Government on 17 July, 2023
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.07.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
and
W.M.P.Nos.8014 & 11946 of 2023, 208 of 2022,
30037 of 2021, 28935 of 2021, 9810 and 9812 of 2020
and 8529 of 2023
W.P.No.7800 of 2023
1.U.Shamima
2.A.Umar ...Petitioners
-Vs-
1.The Secretary to Government,
Ministry of Shipping Surface Transport
and Highways, Transport Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by its Project Director, Senthomas Mount,
Near Kathipara Junction, Chennai – 16.
3.National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by DGM and Project Director,
Sri Tower, 3rd Floor, DP34(SP),
Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 32.
1/18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
4.The Special Tahsildar [LA] Unit II,
National Highways, Tiruvallur District,
Kancheepuram. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the Notification
No.S.O.232(E) issued by the 1st respondent on 21.02.2006 under Section 3D
of the National Highways Act, as having lapsed in respect of the lands
belonging to the petitioners in Survey No.22/1, 22/B, 34/1, 25, 26, 27/2B &
29/1D totally measuring 152.27 cents located in the village of
Adayalampattu, presently in Poonamallee Taluk, Tiruvallur District and
quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.N.Sivaprakash
For R1 : Mr.B.Rabu Manohar
Senior Central Govt. Standing Counsel
For R2 & R3 : Mr.D.Ravichander
Special Government Pleader
For R4 : Ms.S.R.Sumathy
W.P.No.174 of 2022
1.Mohamed Ibrahim
2.A.Mohamed Yunus ...Petitioners
-Vs-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
1.The National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by its Project Director,
Sri Tower, 3rd Floor,
DP-34, SP Industrial Estate,
Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.
2.Competent Authority &
Special District Revenue Officer (LA),
National Highways,
Kancheepuram & Tiruvallur Districts
at Kancheepuram.
3.M/s.Rajparis Civil Constructions Ltd.,
Rep. by its Director,
Mr.R.Satchidanandam,
Old No.162-B, New No.30,
Greams Lane, Thousand Lights,
Chennai – 600 006.
4.U.Shamima
5.A.Umar ...Respondents
[R4 & R5 impleaded vide dated 17.07.2023
made in W.M.P.No.2811 of 2023]
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records
pertaining to the impugned award bearing Rc.No.137/2006/NH/TVR dated
31.08.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent in respect to the petitioners'
property situated at Survey Nos.16/2B, 17, 18/1A2, 18/2A, 21/1B, 22/1,
22/2B, 22/3B, 23/2, 24/1, 25, 26, 27/1, 27/2B2, 28/1, 28/2, 29/1B2, 29/1C,
29/1D, 30/2, 32/1 (Previously Nos.16/2, 17, 18/1A2, 18/2A, 21/1B, 22/1,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
22/2B, 22/3B, 23/2, 24/1, 25, 26, 27/1, 27/2B Pt, 28/1, 28/2, 29/1B, 29/1C,
29/1D, 30/2, 32/1) and quash the same and further direct the 3rd respondent.
For Petitioners : Mr.Gowthaman, Senior Counsel
for Mr.B.Deepak Narayanan
For R1 : Ms.S.R.Sumathy
For R2 : Mr.D.Ravichander
Special Government Pleader
For R3 : Mr.A.Sathyaseelan
For R4 & R5 : Mr.N.Sivaprakash
W.P.No.28435 of 2021
1.K.Pathimuthu
2.Dhilsad Banu
3.A.Jamila Banu ...Petitioners
-Vs-
1.Union of India,
Rep. by The Secretary,
Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways
Transport Bhawan, No.1, Parliament Street,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The Competent Authority and
Special District Revenue Officer (LA),
National Highways – 4 and 5
No.3/4, Lal Bahadur Shastri Street,
Periyakuppam, Near Thulasi Theatre,
Thiruvallur – 602 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
3.DGM (T) cum Project Director PIU Chennai,
National Highways Authority of India,
No.34 DP(SP) Sri Tower,
Guindy Industrial Estate,
Guindy, Chennai – 32. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider
the petitioners representation dated 27.11.2021 to act upon the
representation to either pay the compensation equaling to the present market
value or cancel the Award No.137/2006/NH/TVR, award dated 31.08.2018
for the acquisition of petitioners lands at Survey No.26, 27/1, 27/2B2, 28/1,
28/2, 29/B2, 29/1C, 29/1D, 30/2, 32/1 total extent of 25,400 sq.mt. Or
627.64 cents lands situated at Adyalampattu Village, Thiruvallur District
which has not been utilized by the Authority concern.
For Petitioners : Mr.G.V.Sridharan
For R1 : No appearance
For R2 : Mr.D.Ravichander
Special Government Pleader
For R3 : Ms.S.R.Sumathy
W.P.No.27413 of 2021
1.K.Pathimuthu
2.Dhilsad Banu
3.A.Jamila Banu ...Petitioners
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
-Vs-
1.Union of India,
Rep. by The Secretary,
Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways
Transport Bhawan, No.1, Parliament Street,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The Competent Authority and
Special District Revenue Officer (LA),
National Highways – 4 and 5
No.3/4, Lal Bahadur Shastri Street,
Periyakuppam, Near Thulasi Theatre,
Thiruvallur – 602 001.
3.DGM (T) cum Project Director PIU Chennai,
National Highways Authority of India,
No.34 DP(SP) Sri Tower,
Guindy Industrial Estate,
Guindy, Chennai – 32. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider
the representation either to pay the compensation equaling to the present
market value or cancel the Award No.137/2006/NH/TVR, dated 31.08.2018
for the acquisition of petitioners lands at Survey No.16/2B, 17, 18/1A2,
18/2A, 21/1B, 22/1, 22/2B, 22/3B, 23/2, 24/1, 25 total extent of 18,850
sq.mt. Or 627.64 cents lands situated at Adyalampattu Village, Thiruvallur
District which has not been utilized by the Authority concern.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
For Petitioners : Mr.G.V.Sridharan
For R1 : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathy
Senior Panel Counsel
For R2 : Mr.D.Ravichander
Special Government Pleader
For R3 : Ms.S.R.Sumathy
W.P.No.8219 of 2020
1.M.K.Jasmine Sharmila
2.A.Mohammed Ali
3.Mohammed Shafi ...Petitioners
-Vs-
1.The Secretary to Government,
Ministry of Shipping Surface Transport
and Highways, Transport Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by its Project Director,
SPIC House, 8th Floor,
Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.
3.The Special Tahsildar [LA] Unit II,
National Highways, Tiruvallur District,
Ist Floor, Taluk Office,
Poonamalleee – 600 056.
4.U.Shamima
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
5.A.Umar ...Respondents
[R4 & R5 impleaded vide dated 17.07.2023
made in W.M.P.No.2834 of 2023]
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the Notification
No.S.O.232(E) issued by the 1st respondent on 21.02.2006 under Section 3D
of the National Highways Act, 1950 as having lapsed in respect of the lands
belonging to the petitioners in Survey No.16/2, 17, 18/1A2, 27/1, 18/1A1,
27/2B, 18/2A, 24/1, 27/1, 27/2B, 25, 26, 21/1B, 22/2B, 23/2 (Previously
S.Nos.16, 17, 18/1, 18/2, 21/1, 22/1, 22/2, 22/3, 24, 23, 25, 26, 27/1, 27/2,
28/1, 29, 30, 32 and 28/2) measuring to an extent of 4 Acres and 62 cents
located in the village of Adayalampattu, presently in Poonamallee Taluk,
Tiruvallur District.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Sreedhar
For R1 : Mr.K.B.Arul
ACGSC
For R2 : Ms.S.R.Sumathy
For R3 : Mr.D.Ravichander
Special Government Pleader
For R4 & R5 : Mr.N.Sivaprakash
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
COMMON ORDER
The writ petitions are filed challenging the land acquisition
notification issued in the year 2006 and in some writ petitions award has
been challenged. The award was passed on 31.08.2018 by the competent
authority and Special District Revenue Officer [Land Acquisition], National
Highways.
2.The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
mainly contended that there was an enormous delay in passing the award in
land acquisition proceedings. That apart, the authorities have not utilized
the land for several years, not developed the same and possession also
remains with the owners. Therefore, the authorities were not be able to
establish that there is a need for public project as far as the land belonging to
the writ petitioners are concerned. Thus, the acquisition proceedings are to
be dropped. The award was passed only after passing garnishee order by
the High Court in the Original Side with reference to the dispute between the
owners and the third respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
3.The learned senior counsel further contended that the need for
acquisition has not been established by the respondent National Highways
Authority and the delay in concluding the proceedings also remains
unexplained. Thus the award itself is perverse and to be set aside. In
support of the said contention, the learned senior counsel relied on the
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Albert
Emmanual vs. The Union of India and others [W.A.No.174 of 2023 and
batch dated11.04.2023], wherein the Division Bench made the following
observations:
“8.13 Further practically also, the lands of the
petitioners are not needed for the public purpose as the
project is complete in all respects and is commercially
operational from 2011. There was an interim order of
status quo granted pending the writ petitions and the
petitioners continue to possess their lands. Even now, pin
pointedly it is not pleaded before this court that the lands
have to be taken and put to use for a particular purpose.
Therefore, when the project is declared to be fully
complete and operational, it is clear that the lands are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
not needed for public purpose. It is also not in the public
interest to allow the authorities / officers to cling on to
their mistakes and to cause a financial burden to the
Government of India and to the National Highways
Authority of India itself by unnecessarily taking lands
which are not imminently necessary for the public purpose
in question. As a matter of fact, even though these
questions were specifically raised and considered at the
initial/interim order stages by appointment of Advocate
Commissioners, directing the Project Officer to file a
report etc., while disposing of the writ petition, the
Learned Single Judge went only on the maintainability
after receipt of the compensation and did not consider the
peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, which
compels us to interfere in the matter.”
4.The learned Special Government Pleader raised an objection by
stating that acquisition process has been concluded, award passed and
compensation deposited. The writ petitions are filed after passing an award
and the petitioners have not explained the delay. That apart, the petitioners
if aggrieved have to approach the Arbitrator under Section 3(g)(5) of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
National Highways Act and thus the writ petitions are liable to be rejected.
5.The learned Special Government Pleader further contended that the
lands acquired by the Government if not utilized for the purpose to which it
was acquired the Government was at liberty to utilize the land for any public
purpose even in future. Therefore, the contention raised on behalf of the
petitioners that there is no necessity for land acquisition is untenable. In
order to substantiate the said ground, the learned Special Government
Pleader relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of D.Birlla David vs. Government of India rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Shipping Road Transport and Highways and others reported
in 2022 SCC Online Madras 860, wherein it was held as follows:
“7.The provisions of National Highways Act, 1956
are not similar or pari materia to the provisions of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act of 1894”).
Rather, with the issuance of notification for acquisition,
followed by a notification under Section 3(D) of the Act of
1956, the land vests in the Central Government free from
all encumbrance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
8.The aforesaid aspect has been taken into
consideration by the learned Single Judge while dealing
with the issues and it was held that the land was to be
acquired for widening of the road, however, finding that
certain lands of the Board are also to be acquired, thus, a
meeting of the High-Level Committee was held. It was
resolved to allot alternate land to the Board and thereby
use their land for the road. On the aforesaid arrangement,
the land in question was acquired so that with the
exchange of land with the Board, the widening of the road
can be carried out. The aforesaid has been mentioned in
the award. Otherwise, it could have been arranged
subsequent to the passing of the award. Thus, acquisition
of the land was for the purpose of widening of the road.
Therefore, ipso facto, we cannot agree with learned
counsel for the appellants that the acquisition of the land
was beyond the scope and ambit of the provisions of the
Act of 1956.”
6.A perusal of the order impugned reveals that the award was passed
on 31.08.2018 and the Land Acquisition Officer categorically recorded the
facts which would explain the delay for passing the award. Undoubtedly the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 2006 and the land owners
originally not attended the enquiry and it was postponed. Meanwhile one
Mr.V.N.Devadass filed a writ petition in W.P.No.9961 of 2006 against the
Union of India and five others challenging the acquisition proceedings. An
interim stay was granted and the petitioner filed a civil suit in the Fast Track
Court, Poonamallee in this regard. The writ petition was dismissed on
14.09.2012 on the ground that the issues are to be decided by the Civil
Court. Further, P.M.R. Educational Trust filed another writ petition in
W.P.No.34964 of 2006 seeking exemption of their lands from acquisition
proceedings. The said writ petition was dismissed by the High Court on
21.03.2011 as infructuous. The writ appeal filed by the said Trust was
entertained and an interim stay was granted in the writ appeal. In view of
the interim order granted in W.A.No.214/2014, the authorities were not in a
position to pass award. That award, the 6th respondent Garnishee was
directed to deposit the compensation amount for the acquired land to the
credit of C.S.No.478 of 2007 within two months. At that outset, it is
contended that several litigations were instituted and interim orders were in
force during the interregnum period and the Land Acquisition Officers was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
not in a position to pass award. However, pursuant to the garnishee order,
the award amount has already been deposited by the second respondent.
7.Thus the delay in passing the award cannot be a reason to quash the
award now under challenge in the present writ petitions. Compensation
determined was deposited and the dispute exists between the parties. The
Parties are at liberty to resolve the disputes in the manner known to law. As
far as the award is concerned, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the
Arbitrator under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act for the
purpose of redressing their grievance, if any exist.
8.The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
made a submission that at the time of initial assessment for acquiring the
subject lands, the technical team found that the lands are not fit for public
projects. However, the said submission has been disputed by the learned
Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent by stating that the
lands are to be utilized for truck bay which is of paramount importance as
far as the particular locality is concerned and thus, the submission is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
incorrect. However, these technical aspects cannot be gone into by the High
Court in a writ proceedings and it is for the authorities to make an
assessment and act accordingly and the lands acquired
9.As rightly pointed by the learned Special Government Pleader, the
land acquired can be utilized for any other public purpose and re-conveyance
is a policy to be taken by the Government and the High Court cannot pass
any orders to re-convey the land with reference to the relief as such sought
for in the present writ petition. Thus, the writ petitioners are at liberty to
work out their remedy for enhancement of compensation or otherwise in the
manner contemplated under the Act.
10.With these liberty, all the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.07.2023
Index:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
cse
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Ministry of Shipping Surface Transport
and Highways, Transport Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001.
2.The National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by its Project Director, Senthomas Mount,
Near Kathipara Junction, Chennai – 16.
3.National Highways Authority of India,
Rep. by DGM and Project Director,
Sri Tower, 3rd Floor, DP34(SP),
Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 32.
4.The Special Tahsildar [LA] Unit II,
National Highways, Tiruvallur District,
Kancheepuram.
5.The Secretary,
Union of India,
Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways
Transport Bhawan, No.1, Parliament Street,
New Delhi – 110 001.
6.The Competent Authority and
Special District Revenue Officer (LA),
National Highways – 4 and 5
No.3/4, Lal Bahadur Shastri Street,
Periyakuppam, Near Thulasi Theatre,
Thiruvallur – 602 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022, 28435 of 2021,
27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
cse
W.P.Nos.7800 of 2023, 174 of 2022,
28435 of 2021, 27413 of 2021 and 8219 of 2020
17.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
