ANNAPURNA SAHITA KASI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the purpose of widening of National Highway No.9 Vijayawada-Machilipatnam section in the State of Andhra Pradesh, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways proposed to acquire land to an extent of 8177 sq meters in Machilipatnam town and Mandal. Notification dated 26.5.2009 was issued under Section 3A (1) of National Highways Act,1956 (for short the Act, 1956) expressing intention to acquire above extent of land. On due consideration of the objections filed by some of the owners, same were rejected vide proceedings dated 25.11.2009. Petitioner herein filed W P No. 28442 of 2009 challenging the notification under Section 3A published in the Government of India gazette on 26.5.2009 and in the Hindu daily newspaper on 16.7.2009. This Court by order dated 29.12.2009 stayed all further proceedings. However, on 20.01.2010 declaration under Section 3D was issued and Award No. 7 of 2012 was passed on 31.12.2012.

(2.) In the said writ petition, petitioner opposed acquisition of his property on the ground that it would be offending Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India as right to worship based on a community's overwhelming belief in their religious practices and acquiring the property in issue would be offending the said right. It is also contended that while acquiring the land for widening of the road, land was sought to be acquired only on one side of the road and not evenly on either side of the road. The substantive grievance of the petitioner is that by present acquisition, entire property of the petitioner is affected causing huge financial loss and infrastructure already created for performing the religious functions totally gets wiped out. As during the pendency of the writ petition, award was passed, petitioner also filed application to amend the prayer in the writ petition challenging Award No. 7 of 2012 dated 31.8.2012 which relief was granted by the order of the Court dated 27.3.2018.

(3.) The plea taken by respondents was three fold. They contended that alignment was finalized and it is not possible to change the alignment at the instance of individual property owner and that change of alignment is not possible as it will have serious repercussions on overall alignment of the road. It was also contended that by the time award was passed on 31.8.2012 the competent authority was not aware of the stay granted by this Court and consequent to passing of the award land vests in National Highway Authority of India (for short NHAI). It was also averred that petitioner filed representation dated 17.10.2017 expressing no objection to cooperate with NHAI authorities for formation of four lane road, if land acquisition authority makes separate award under latest Rules and expressed no objection to withdraw the writ petition and to hand over the site.