Madras High Court
The Chief General Manager vs K.Ramanathan on 13 June, 2023
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.06.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
1. The Chief General Manager
Chennai Region
1/54-28, Butt Road
St. Thomas Mount, Chennai 600 016.
2. The Project Director
National Highway Authority of India
No.51/2 50 feet Road
Krishnaswamy Nagar, Ramanathapuram
Coimbatore. .. Appellants
Vs.
1. K.Ramanathan
2. R.Sugunalatha
3. The Competent Authority & Special DRO (LA)
NH-47 & 67, Coimbatore.
4. The National Highways Authority of India
Rep. by the Chairman
Corporate Office, G5 & 6, Sector 10
Dwaraka, New Delhi 110 075. .. Respondents
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
order dated 08.02.2022 made in W.P.No.34565 of 2012.
For the Appellants : Mr.G.Adithyaraj
For M/s. Wilson Associates
For the Respondents : Mr.K.V.Muthu Visakan
for Respondent-1
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.G.Adithyaraj, learned counsel for the
appellants and Mr.K.V.Muthu Visakan, learned counsel for the first
respondent.
2. The respondents 1 and 2 had filed writ petition before this
Court seeking compensation of Rs.21,50,933/- regarding the well.
3. The learned Singe Judge allowed the said writ petition
directing the appellants and the third and fourth respondents to pay
the compensation amount. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal
has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
National Highways Authority of India on 13.08.2012 recommended
that it is not necessary to acquire the well in S.No.117/2 at
Velayuthampalayam Village. The Project Director, Coimbatore was
directed to barricade all along the well with W beam, metal crash
barrier to ensure the safety of the road users.
5. According to learned counsel, the learned Single Judge
could not have entered into the debate whether it is necessary to
barricade well or could have directed payment of compensation
exercising writ jurisdiction. Merely on the basis of photograph, the
learned Single Judge ought not to have arrived at any conclusion.
6. Expert opinion is relied upon by the learned Single Judge to
come to the conclusion that the well is abutting the Highways and if
the well is not acquired, it will cause great danger to the road users,
especially in the night time and it is essential to acquire the well
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
also and directed compensation to be paid. The compensation
amount cannot be paid without an award. No award has been
passed.
7. Learned counsel for the first respondent supports the order
and submits that there are three reports of the experts which
suggest that it is utmost necessary to acquire the well or close down
the well. The compensation awarded is the expenses required for
closing down the well.
8. We have considered the submissions.
9. It appears that the learned Single Judge has directed
payment of compensation on the basis of expert opinion that the
well is abutting the highway and is required to be acquired. If it is
not acquired, it will cause danger to the road users. Certainly, the
Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, could not have
embarked upon such reasoning. However, an award dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
09.03.2012 has been pointed out bearing Award No. 48 of 2011,
wherein the competent authority has passed an award valuing the
well on the basis of the estimate received from the Executive
Engineer, PWD (WRO) at Rs.21,50,933/- and directed payment of
the same to the writ petitioners.
10. Though it is submitted by learned counsel for the
appellants that the award is not properly passed, the appellants
have not challenged the said award for a period of 11 years. Now, it
will be too late in the day for the appellants to contend that the
award is not properly passed.
11. We could have considered the submissions of learned
counsel for the appellants with regard to the legality of the award
had the appellants challenged the award. In the absence of
challenge to the Award No. 48 of 2011, the appellants as well as the
writ petitioners are bound by the said award.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
12. In the light of that, no case for interference is made out.
The learned Single Judge had directed the appellants to deposit the
amount within six weeks from the date of the order. Period of six
weeks has come to an end long back. By way of an indulgence, we
permit the present appellants to deposit the said amount within six
weeks from today, failing which, the amount will carry interest at
9% per annum from the date of the order of the learned Single
Judge.
The writ appeal is disposed of. There will be no order as to
costs.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
13.06.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kpl
To
1. The Competent Authority & Special DRO (LA)
NH-47 & 67, Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
2. The National Highways Authority of India
Rep. by the Chairman
Corporate Office, G5 & 6, Sector 10
Dwaraka, New Delhi 110 075.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(kpl)
W.A.No.1181 of 2023
13.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
