Madras High Court
Assistant Divisional Engineer vs R.Chokkappan ... 1St on 26 August, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A(MD)No.2317 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
W.A(MD)No.2317 of 2025
and
C.M.P(MD)No.13050 of 2025
Assistant Divisional Engineer
Highways (Construction and Maintenance),
Aruppukottai,
Virudhunagar District. ... Appellant//3rd Party
Vs.
1.R.Chokkappan ... 1st Respondent/Writ petitioner
2.The Project Director,
National Highways Authority of India,
Transport Department,
Plot No.3, Surya Towers,
First East Street,
K.K.Nagar, Madurai-20.
3.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
4.The Special District Revenue Officer,
District Collectorate - D Section
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2317 of 2025
Land Acquisition- National Highways,
Virudhunagar-626 101.
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Aruppukottai Taluk,
Virudhunagar.
6.The Special Tahsildar (L.A)
National Highways -38,
Aruppukottai,
Virudhunagar. ... Respondents 2 to 6/
Respondents 1 to 5
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of the Letters Patent Appeal, to
set aside the order dated 21.10.2024 in W.P(MD)No.21521 of 2017.
For Appellant : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
For R1 : Mr.S.Kadarkarai
For R2 : Mr.P.Karthick
For R3 to R6 : Mr.M.Sarangan
Additional Public Prosecutor
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)
The State Highways Authority has preferred this intra Court appeal as
against the order dated 21.10.2024 made in W.P.(MD)No.21521 of 2017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
2. The first respondent / writ petitioner had approached the Writ Court
seeking for a direction to pay the compensation in respect of the lands belonging
to him in Survey No.60/19 as the same has been unauthorisedly used and put in
use by forming a road by the Highway Authorities. The Writ Court by relying on
the inspection report dated 14.10.2024 arrived at a conclusion that the lands of the
writ petitioner were used by the Highways Authorities and already road has been
formed without acquisition and paying compensation to the land owner. The Writ
Court, after arriving at such a conclusion, had directed the appellant State
Highways Authority to pay compensation to the writ petitioner, within a period of
four months.
3. It is the contention of the learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the appellant that presently the road has been handed over to the
State Highways Authorities. But it is only the National Highways Authority which
had implemented the project and therefore, the National Railways Authority ought
to have paid the compensation to the land owners before taking possession of the
lands. When the National Highways Authority has not made such payment, it is
for the writ petitioner to seek compensation only from the National Highways
Authority. But however, when the State Highways Authority is not even a party to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
the writ petition, the Writ Court issued the impugned directions by directing the
State Highways Authority to pay compensation to the writ petitioner, which
cannot be sustained and as such, he seeks for indulgence of this Court.
4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent /
National Highways would submit that though the National Highways Authority
had completed and executed the project, the road has already been handed over to
the State Highways Department as early as in the year 2011 and therefore, now the
road is within the maintenance and possession of the State Highways Authorities.
It is for the State Highways Authority to make the necessary compensation to the
writ petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the first respondent / writ petitioner would
submit that when admittedly the patta lands belonging to him had been taken over
without acquiring or paying any compensation and already the road has been
formed, he is only interested in receiving the compensation, which is to be paid
either by the appellant and other official respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
6. Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on
record.
7. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner / first respondent is the
owner of the lands measuring an extent of 0.11.50 hectares in S.No.60/19 and
0.11.50 hectares in S.No.60/20. It is also not in dispute that already the link road
project has been executed by the National Highways Authority. It is for the
National Highways Authority to compensate the land owners by paying the
compensation that has arrived at. The State Highways Authority ought to have
acquired and handed over the lands to the National Highways Authority, for
which, the National Highways Authority should have paid the compensation to the
land owners before executing the project.
8. However, without resorting to acquisition, the lands of the petitioner
had already been taken over and utilised for the Highways Project. Now, when the
properties of the petitioner have already been taken over and utilised without
paying necessary compensation, the authorities are only trying to shift the blame
on each other. But we also see force in the submission of the learned Special
Government Pleader. Even though, now the road has been handed over to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
State Highways Authority, but when the project has been implemented by the
National Highways Authority, the State Highways Authority was only to initiate
acquisition proceedings and hand over the lands to the National Highways and the
compensation i.e., arrived is only to be paid by the National Highways Authority
before implementing the project.
9. In the instant case, this has not been followed and the writ Court had
directed the State Highways Authority the appellant herein to make the payment.
We feel that the relevant portion of the orders of the Writ Court is required to be
modified. In view of the above, the respondents 4 to 6 in the appeal are directed to
quantify the compensation in respect of the lands of the petitioner, which has been
taken over and used for executing the Link Road project in accordance with the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the new Act, 2013”). It is
needless to say that the arrival of compensation will be inclusive of interest and
solatium as contemplated under the new Act 2013. Such an exercise shall be
undertaken and completed by the respondents 4 to 6, within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
10. On the compensation being arrived by the respondents 4 to 6 under
the new Act, 2013, the compensation so arrived shall be communicated to the
second respondent, who in turn shall make necessary payment to the writ
petitioner / first respondent, within a period of eight weeks, thereafter.
11. With the above observations and modification, the writ appeal is
disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(S.M.S., J.) & (G.A.M., J.)
26.08.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
am
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
To
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Special District Revenue Officer,
District Collectorate - D Section
Land Acquisition- National Highways,
Virudhunagar-626 101.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Aruppukottai Taluk,
Virudhunagar.
4.The Special Tahsildar (L.A)
National Highways -38,
Aruppukottai,
Virudhunagar.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
am
26.08.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2025 01:36:15 pm )
