LAWS(PAT)-2023-7-46

DHAN JEE PANDEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On July 31, 2023
Dhan Jee Pandey Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(2.) The facts of this case are that for the purpose of four-laning of N.H.-84 in the district of Buxar, the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) had issued notifications in the official Gazettee for acquisition of land. Accordingly, the land of the petitioner's father bearing Mauza-Churampur, Thana-353, Plot No.1395, area-0.046 hectare was acquired. Since at that time, the father of the petitioner died the elder brother of the petitioner namely, late Rama Shankar Pandey, completed all the formalities and received the entire compensation amount of Rs.14,29,655.00. The said amount was paid to the elder brother of the petitioner in the year 2014 itself vide award dtd. 14/2/2014 passed by the competent authority-cum-DCLR, Buxar (respondent No.5) in Compensation Case No. 19 of 2014. After completing all the formalities, the land of the petitioner was acquired. However, the respondent no.5 issued order dtd. 23/9/2020 directing the petitioner to refund the excess amount of Rs.8,42,946.00, which has been paid to the brother of the petitioner, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondents is beyond the power granted to them under the relevant provisions of the NHAI Act. In fact, there is no provision in the Act which authorizes them to recover the compensation once paid by changing the nature of land. He further submits that the fresh compensation has been determined behind the back of the petitioner without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and therefore, the impugned order is ultra vires to Sec. 21 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. He also submits that the respondents cannot recover the alleged excess amount of compensation from the petitioner as the same was never paid to him rather it was paid to his elder brother, who is now deceased.