SATISHBHAI VIRIYABHAI GAMIT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of the present petition, the petitioners (35 in number) are seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) At the outset, we may note that the proceedings of acquisition of the lands in question under the National Highways Act, 1956, has been concluded with the making of the awards, as per own case of the petitioners herein, in the year 2011 and 2012. The challenge to the constitutionality of Ss. 3G(5) and 3G(6) by the petitioners landholders on various grounds raised in the writ petition, seem to be academic as there is no averment in the writ petition as to how these provisions would prejudice the petitioners herein. The writ petition is completely silent as to whether the petitioners have taken recourse to Sec. 3G(5), to challenge the award passed by the competent authority, approaching the arbitrator.

(3.) The assertions in the writ petition are to the effect that notices under Sec. 3E of the National Highways Act, 1956 were received by the petitioners after the awards were made in the year 2011 - 2012 directing them to handover the possession of their lands and asking them to collect the compensation amount. There is no disclosure as to when the petitioners have received compensation under the award declared in the year 2011 - 2012 and when the possession of the lands in question had been taken. In fact, the entire writ petition has been drafted on the basis of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh, [(2019) 9 SCC 304] dtd. 19/9/2019, wherein while considering the challenge to the 1997 Amendment Act, Sec. 3J of the National Highways Act introduced by 1997 Amendment, has been declared as unconstitutional being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.