LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-181

S.DHAKSHINAMOORTHY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On June 04, 2019
S.Dhakshinamoorthy Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the notification issued under Section 3(A)(1) of the National Highways Act (Act No.48 of 195) (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act'') to acquire lands of the petitioners for the purpose of laying National Highway No.45C and the consequential orders rejecting the objections of the petitioners against the above said notification, these writ petitions have been filed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 2nd respondent issued the impugned notification dated 05.02.2013 under Section 3(A)(1) of the National Highways Act, expressing the intention of the Government to acquire the lands of the petitioners comprised in various survey numbers for public purpose of laying National Highway No.45C, Vikkiravandi- Kumbakonam-Tanjore Section between Km 100/000 and 165/000. The persons interested in the lands sought to be acquired were instructed by the impugned notification dated 05.02.2013 to file their objections within 21 days before the competent authority, namely, 2nd respondent, with an information that objections would be considered and objector would be given opportunity of hearing in person or through counsel. It was also stated in the notification that the decision of the competent authority shall be final as provided under Section 3(C)(2) of the National Highways Act.

(3.) It is further submitted that the petitioners had submitted detailed representations raising several objections against the proposed acquisition of land for laying national highway, contending that acquisition notification dated 05.02.2013 is bereft of material particulars, inasmuch as instead of mentioning the specific names of owners of the land proposed to be acquired, it was merely stated as ''private'' and mere mentioning of land survey numbers is not sufficient as in the village areas, lands would have been leased out to third parties. Further, in the representations, it was stated that already there was an objection raised regarding the acquisition of land and the present acquisition is not in terms of the plan which was issued earlier and road plan was altered only in order to favor some private individuals who are influential with the Governmental authorities and road plan was re-aligned in such a manner to defeat the interest of agriculturists and the road would cut through several houses in colony area.