TRIVENI PRASAD AND ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition by seven petitioners was filed claiming relief over plot no. 696 contending that they are the recorded tenure holders of the said plot which has been unlawfully occupied by the National Highways Authority of India to widen the road and to raise a Toll Plaza. Directions were issued on 24.4.2014 to obtain instructions but since instructions were not coming forward a Division Bench of this Court on 18.7.2014 passed an interim order restraining the respondents from interfering with the possession of the disputed land being plot no. 696 at village Dakhina Sheikhpur, Tehsil Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow till further orders.

(2.) The National Highways Authority of India moved an application for vacating the said order along with a counter affidavit dated 24.9.2015 wherein it has been stated that a notification for acquisition was issued under the National Highways Act, 1956 inviting objections and pursuant thereto reports were obtained on the objections so filed, whereafter, on opportunity being provided the compensation was determined and the award was delivered on 25.7.2015. The counter affidavit categorically states that the notification was issued for acquisition of the disputed plot to the extent of 0.3110 Hect. only for which compensation has been awarded and the petitioners have been put to notice for disbursement of such compensation. A dispute has been raised with regard to the quantum of the same as the petitioners' are claiming assessment and quantification in terms of The Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The petitioners also urge that an alternative nearby land was available and, therefore, acquiring the roadside land of the petitioner has put them to considerable loss and they would also be deprived of any access to their remaining land from the roadside. These facts have been said in the rejoinder sworn by Sri Narmada Prasad dated 8.10.2015.

(3.) An amendment application has been filed by the petitioners wherein they allege that they had moved a representation for acquiring plot no. 807 belonging to the Gaon Sabha but the same was rejected by the communication dated 22.11.2014 which is subject matter of challenge in the said application with a prayer to quash the notification dated 16.2.2015 and the notification dated 8.9.2014 issued under the 1956 Act. Objection to the said amendment application has been filed and we have heard Ms. Samidha for the National Highways Authority of India who has pointed out that this cannot now be permitted inasmuch as the compensation has already been dispensed with and the policy decision which was taken to assess the feasibility of the acquisition of the disputed land, had been approved by the competent committee, which was done completely in public interest without any intention of causing any prejudice to the petitioners. The Authority has taken a conscious decision keeping in view the location of the land and the alternative land suggested by the petitioner was unacceptable. A rejoinder affidavit to the said objection has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners where it has been asserted that the petitioner cannot use their property appropriately as they have been deprived of the roadside facing area of their land. It has also been alleged that the acquisition of the petitioners plot is not required for alignment of the road but for constructing a toll plaza.