VEERAPPA S/O GUDDE THIMMAIAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS DEPARTMENT AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI PROJECT, HASSAN DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PUBLIC authorities, statutory authorities, administrative authorities in this country think they are law unto to themselves; they come before court in answer to the notices issued in the writ petitions wherein the aggrieved persons/citizens of the country file petitions seeking for judicial review of administrative action only to claim to be immune from scrutiny and examination, on the bogey of some action having been taken based on some expert advice or on some technical advice.

(2.) THE present writ petition is one such case, where the writ Petitioner, owner of a land and building located in the vicinity of national highway No 48 at Madigundanahalli, Kudur hobli, Magadi taluk, Ramanagaram district, is complaining that considerable extent of his land and building, in all measuring about 1416 sq.mtrs spread over two survey numbers viz., Sy No 37/2D and 37/2E, have been notified for acquisition by the central government for the benefit of national highways authorities under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 [for short, the Act), but the proceedings have taken place in a haphazard, arbitrary, whimsical and even prejudicial manner to the Petitioner, to the detriment of the Petitioner and has therefore sought for the following relief:

(3.) STATEMENT of objections has been filed on behalf of the second Respondent contending that the acquisition of part of land and building belonging to the Petitioner is for the purpose of widening of existing highway into a four -lane highway from KM 28.00 to KM 110 on NH48 [Nelamangala to Hassan section]: that the ministry of shipping, road transport and highways is concerned with this project and had caused acquisition proceedings exercising the power under Sub -section (1) Section 3 of the Act by issue of notification dated 17 -11 -2006, declaring its intention to acquire the land mentioned in the schedule to the notification; that it has been duly notified, objections invited, objectors heard and acquisition proceedings processed and finalized; that the petition averments are incorrect, perverse, without substance; that the project of widening the road is being carried on in consonance with the parameters set by the Indian Road Congress and the detailed project report has been prepared by a team of experts and consultants, keeping in view the geometric viz., vertical and horizontal curves, topography of area and design, speed etc; that all technical details have been kept in mind; that while it is a fact that the Petitioner had filed his objections to the proposal, the Petitioner has been heard, but his objections have been rejected by the special land acquisition officer and thereafter acquisition proceedings have been finalized and the project manager of the highways authority has passed an order disallowing the objections; that thereafter, acquisition proceedings have been finalized; that the allegation of the Petitioner that the road takes a deliberate curve at the place where the Petitioner's land and building is located, is incorrect; that the alignment of road and the curves are all keeping in view the need for the widening the road and straightening the road; that a copy of the alignment plan of the highway at that plot, produced at Annexure -Rl to the statement of objections, is testimony of the Respondents conduct and action to develop the proposed four -lane of the highway, keeping in mind the geometry of the road for the purpose of widening and also to ensure the improvement of horizontal curves and minimizing the curves wherever it is inevitable etc., in terms of para -5 of the statement of objections, reading as under: