JAGMOHAN SINGH RAWAT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue involved in these 11 writ petitions is one and same, therefore, for convenience, all these writ petitions are being considered and disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a proposal for widening of NH-309 at Tanda Chauraha-Chilkiya has been undertaken, pursuant to which, a Notification dtd. 4/11/2025 has been issued by the Authorities. He further submits that the petitioners, being aggrieved by the said action of the authorities, made a collective representation to the authorities concerned, asserting that the petitioners are entitled for relaxation from the proposed width, as per Uttar Pradesh Road Side Land Control Act, 1945 and Rule 7 of Rules, 1964 framed thereunder.

(3.) Learned Government Counsel as well as the counsel appearing for NHAI submits that the Competent Authority to consider and decide the objections/representation, in this regard, is Competent Authority Land Acquisition, as defined under Sec. 3C(2) of The National Highways Act, 1956, which reads as under:-