TIRATH RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of present petition, the petitioners have challenged order dtd. 29/12/2021 passed by respondent No. 3, so far as it pertains to determination of amount of compensation in terms of Sec. 3G(3) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act of 1956'). The petitioners have also sought a direction upon respondent No. 3 to comply with the provisions contained in Sec. 3G of the Act of 1956 and determine the amount of compensation as per market value of the land and release the same in favour of the petitioners alongwith interest @ 12% per annum.

(2.) As per the case of the petitioners, their land situated at Sarore Adda, village Patti, Tehsil Bari Brahmana, District Samba has been acquired by the respondents for construction of Highway. It has been submitted that the acquisition proceedings conducted by the respondents are contrary to the provisions contained in the Act of 1956, inasmuch as, no notice in terms of the provision contained in Sec. 3G(3) of the Act of 1956 has been published in the newspapers. It has been further submitted that as per the impugned order, notices under Sec. 3G(3) of the Act of 1956 were published in the Daily Excelsior and Amar Ujala on 8/12/2021 but the fact of the matter remains that no such notices were published in the aforesaid newspapers on the said date. It has also been contended that the compensation assessed by the competent authority i.e. respondent No. 3 is not as per the market value of the land and this has caused serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioners.

(3.) Reply to the writ petition has been filed by the indenting department, respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 as also by respondent Nos. 3 and 5. In their reply, respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 have submitted that the petitioners have concealed from this Court the fact that the villagers of the village Patti Tehsil Bari Brahamana had filed writ petition bearing WP(C) 870/2022 in representative capacity before the this Court challenging the proceedings with regard to acquisition of the land for construction of Delhi-Katra Expressway in District Samba. The said writ petition came to be dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court in terms of order dtd. 21/4/2022. It has been contended that the petitioners, who happen to be the residents of the same village, cannot file the instant writ petition individually that too by suppressing the fact relating to dismissal of the earlier writ petition. On merits, respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 have submitted that there is no error or illegality in the acquisition proceedings and that the proceedings have been conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act of 1956. It has been further submitted that no rights of the petitioners have been infringed and that adequate compensation has been awarded in favour of the land owners. It has also been contended that in case the petitioners feel dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded in their favour, they have the alternative remedy of seeking appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of sub Sec. (5) of Sec. 3G of the Act of 1956.