DEVENDER SINGH Vs. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by Devender Singh, inter alia, with the prayers that the order dtd. 2/6/2018 (Annexure P-6) as well as the calculation of compensation (Annexure P-7) shown to be paid to respondents No.3 to 6 as a whole be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to pay the compensation amount falling to the share of the petitioner to the tune of Rs.10,70,368.00 by issuing a writ of mandamus.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land bearing Khewat No.35, Khatauni No.51, Khasra No.423, measuring 0-1-5 bigha and Khasra No.1151/424, measuring 1-7- 16 bighas situated in Mohal Takoli/510, Tehsil Aut, District Mandi, has been recorded in the ownership and possession of the petitioner, respondents No.3 to 6, Smt. Leela and Smt. Parvati. Smt. Leela and Smt. Parvati have given their share to respondents No.3 to 6, the petitioner has 413 share in this land out of total share 1180. It is contended that respondents No.1 and 2 i.e. National Highways Authority of India and the Land Acquisition Collector started acquiring the land and structure of the villagers of village Takoli for construction of four lane road between Mandi to Manali and some portion of Khasra No.423 and 1151/424, measuring 0/8/81 hectares was acquired for the aforesaid purpose and the compensation of the land was assessed by respondents No.1 and 2 correctly and the same was paid to the petitioner as well as respondents No.3 to 6 as per their share. There was a civil litigation between the petitioner and his brother in the civil Court and both the parties have entered into a compromise on 2/6/1997. The petitioner has left the area of Khasra No.1151/424, measuring 1/7/16 bigha alongwith structure in favour of Sh. Devi Singh, father of respondents No.3 to 6 and as per compromise the suit of Sh. Devi Singh was decreed, but, the petitioner has not left his right, title and interest over Khasra No.423 in which structure is standing. It is further contended that as per order dtd. 17/11/2017, the compensation amount of Khasra No.423 has been rightly awarded to the petitioner, but the amount of compensation on account of acquiring of structure of Khasra No.423 has wrongly been paid to respondents No.3 to 6. As far as structure of respondents No.3 to 6 over Khasra No.11541/424 is concerned, there is no dispute. The amount of compensation falling to the share of the petitioner on account of acquiring of structure on Khasra No.423 has been assessed to the tune of Rs.10,70,368.00 which is clear from the calculation made by respondents No.1 and 2. Later on respondent No.2 has corrected the award and whole of the compensation amount of the structure acquired bearing Khasra No.423 has been paid to respondents No.3 to 6 in equal share. This correction was made by the respondents behind the back of the petitioner, without giving him notice and affording any opportunity of hearing.

(3.) Ms.Shreya Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent No.1, has opposed the writ petition and submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable in present nature in view of the available remedy provided under Sec. 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 and the petitioner is required to approach the competent authority for redressal of his grievances.