Karnataka High Court
Sri. G. C.Thippeswamy vs The Union Of India on 16 April, 2018
Equivalent citations: 2018 AIR CC 2147 (KAR), (2018) 188 ALLINDCAS 866 (KAR), 2018 (3) AKR 39, (2018) 4 KANT LJ 454, (2019) 2 CIVLJ 229, 2018 (3) KCCR SN 271 (KAR)
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
1/33
R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 (LA-RES)
C/W
W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 (LA-RES)
W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017:
Between:
1. Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy
S/o Gowdra Chennappa
Aged about 53 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk.
2. Sri. G. Anantha Reddy
S/o late Gowdra Chennappa
Aged about 70 years
Guddadarangavanahalli Village
Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk.
3. Smt. Jyothi
W/o Srinivasa Reddy
Aged about 37 years
Guddadarangavanahalli Village
Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk.
4. Smt. Jayamma
Mother & Minor Guardian
of Sri. Sanna Kariyappa
Aged about 54 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
2/33
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
5. Sri. N.S. Hanumantha Reddy
S/o Sri. Simpraiah
Aged about 65 years
Guddadharangavanahalli
Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk.
6. Sri. S.M. Thippeswamy
S/o Sannamaliayappa
Aged about 66 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli, Chitradurga Taluk.
7. Sri. Thippeswamy
S/o late Siriyappa
Aged about 70 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
8. Smt. Rathnmma
W/o Sri. Nagappa
Aged about 45 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
9. Sri. Bommaiah
S/o late Machaiah
Aged about 70 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
10. Sri. Thippeswamy
S/o P.K. Veerakariyappa
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
3/33
Aged about 45 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
11. Sri. Vikramappa
S/o Sri. Machaiah
Aged about 70 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
12. Sri. E. Chidhanandappa
S/o Sri. Kuntirappa
Aged about 60 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
13. Sri. Paniyappa
S/o Sri. Machaiah
Aged about 50 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
14. Sri. G. Srinivasa Reddy
S/o Gowdara Chinnappa
Aged about 65 years
Guddadarangavvanahalli
Chitradurga Taluk.
15. Sri. G.T. Babureddy
S/o G.B. Thippareddy
Aged about 40 years
Durgadasri Hotel
Chitradurga City.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
4/33
16. Smt. M.K. Shobharani
W/o T.H. Somanathashetty
Aged about 40 years
Rice Mill (Maruti)
Guddadarangavvanahalli
Chitradurga Taluk.
17. Sri. T.K. Krishnareddy
S/o Kariyappa
Aged about 65 years
Guddadarangavvanahalli
Chitradurga Taluk.
18. Smt. Katamma
W/o Chandrappa
Aged about 60 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
19. Sri. Machaiah
S/o Bommaiah
Aged about 60 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
20. Sri. M.K. Venkatesh
S/o Kariyappa
Aged about 43 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
21. Smt. Chitthamma
W/o Earanna
Aged about 60 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
5/33
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
22. Sri. P.K. Nagaraja
S/o Pachchi Kariyappa
Aged about 58 years
Mallapura Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
23. Sri. H. Krishnamurthy
S/o Sri. Huchchappa
Aged about 50 years
Mallapur Gollarahatti
Kasaba Hobli
Chitradurga Taluk.
... Petitioners
(By Mr. B.V. Shankaranarayana Rao, for
Mr. S.F. Goutam Chand, Advocate)
And:
1. The Union of India
Represented by its Secretary
Ministry of Surface Transport
New Delhi-110 001.
2. The National Highways Authority of India
G 5 & 6, Sector-10, Dwarka
New Delhi-110 075
Rep. by its Director.
3. The Special Additional Land Acquisition Officer
National Highways Nos.4 and 13
Aero Plane Building
V.P. Extension, Chitradurga-577501.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
6/33
4. State of Karnataka
Represented by its Secretary
Revenue Department
M.S. Buildings, Banaglore-560 001.
... Respondents
(By Ms. Shilpa Shah, Advocate for R2 & R3
Mr. E.S. Indiresh, AGA for R4; R1- served)
*****
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of
certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing Notification bearing No.SO 276 (E) dated 29-01-
2016 (Annexure-AA) issued by Respondent No.1 in so far as
it relates to the Schedule Property & etc.
W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017:
Between:
Smt. V.G. Lakshmi Devi
W/o late G. Lokesha Reddy
Resident of Guddangavanahalli
Chitradurga Taluk
Rep. by her power of Attorney Holder
Sri. Chennakeshava Reddy.
... Petitioner
(By Mr. B.V. Shankaranarayana Rao, Advocate)
And:
1. The Union of India
Represented by its Secretary
Ministry of Surface Transport
New Delhi-1110 001.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
7/33
2. The National Highways Authority of India
G 5 & 6, Sector - 10, Dwarka
New Delhi-110 075.
3. The Special Additional Land
Acquisition Officer
National Highways Nos.4 and 13
Aero Plane Building
V.P. Extension, Chitradurga-577501.
4. State of Karnataka
Represented by its Secretary
Revenue Department
M.S. Buildings, Bangalore-560 001.
... Respondents
(By Ms. Shilpa Shah, Advocate for R2 & R3
Mr. E.S. Indiresh, AGA for R4; R1 - served)
*****
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of
certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing Notification bearing No.SO 276 (E) dated 29-01-
2016 (Annexure B) issued by Respondent No.1 in so far as it
relates to the Schedule Property & etc.
These Writ Petitions having been heard and reserved
on 11-04-2018, coming on for Pronouncement of Orders,
this day, Dr Vineet Kothari, J, delivered the following:
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017
C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017
Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs.
The Union of India & others
8/33
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner Shri.G.C. Thippeswamy and others of Chitradurga Taluk have filed these writ petitions against the Respondents including the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) on 10/02/2017 and 25/01/2017 challenging the land acquisition initiated by the Respondent under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 vide Preliminary Notification under Section 3-A of the Act dated 29/01/2016 and Final Notification under Section 3-D of the Act dated 19/10/2016.
2. By way of amendment Applications filed by the petitioners in this Court on 11/01/2018, the petitioners have sought to challenge inter alia also the two Awards passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, National Highways Authority of India, Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 9/33 Chitradurga dated 04/11/2017 awarding a sum of `26,96,66,966/- for acquisition of 2,11,664 sq.mtrs. of land acquired with assets for construction of Six lanes of National High Way No.48 (Old NH-4) on the stretch of land from Km. 189.000 to 340.000 in Chitradurga-Haveri Section in the village Guddadarangavvanahalli of Chitradurga Taluk of Chitradurga District. The second Award dated 08/11/2017 awarding a sum of `39,29,46,064/- for acquisition of 2,31,413 sq.mtrs. of land acquired with assets for construction of Six lanes of National High Way No.48 (Old NH-4) on the stretch of land from Km. 189.000 to 340.000 in Chitradurga-Haveri Section in the village Mallapura of Chitradurga Taluk of Chitradurga District in the State of Karnataka has been awarded in favour of the land owners including the present petitioners.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 10/33
3. The Respondent - National Highways Authority of India has filed its Statement Objections to the main writ petitions on 19/04/2017 and separate Statement of Objections to the Applications seeking amendment of the writ petitions on 11/01/2018.
4. The petitioners were represented by Mr.B.V. Shankaranarayana Rao and the Respondent - National Highways Authority of India was represented by Ms.Shilpa Shah. The other proforma Respondents Union of India and State of Karnataka have not filed any Statement of Objections to the present writ petitions.
5. The bone of contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the provisions of the new Land Acquisition law, viz. The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 11/33 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'New L.A. Act of 2013') applies to the acquisitions made under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 also and since the procedure for land acquisition under the New L.A. Act of 2013 has not been adopted in the present case, therefore, the acquisition proceedings itself deserves to be quashed by this Court.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.B.V. Shankaranarayana Rao heavily relied upon the provisions of Section 105 of the New L.A. Act of 2013 and the recent Gazettee Notification No.SO No.2368(E) dated 28/08/2015, both of which are quoted below at a later stage for ready reference.
7. He further submitted that without the Rehabilitation Scheme for land losers besides monetary compensation provided to the land losers and complying Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 12/33 with the mandatory pre-conditions like Social Impact Assessment of such land acquisition etc, the acquisition in the present case for the aforesaid purpose deserves to be declared illegal and deserves to be quashed by this Court and allowing the amendment Application filed by the petitioners even the Awards passed by the Land Acquisition Officer dated 04/11/2017 and 08/11/2017 also deserve to be quashed by this Court.
8. On the other hand, Ms. Shilpa Shah, the learned counsel for the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) vehemently submitted that the provisions the New L.A. Act of 2013 applies to the acquisitions under the National Highways Act, 1956 only to the extent of provisions relating to determination of compensation under the New L.A. Act of 2013 and not beyond that. She has stated that the procedure for acquisition viz. by issuing a Preliminary Notification Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 13/33 under Section 3-A, Final Notification under Section 3-D etc., is covered by the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 itself and that procedure has been followed in the present case but as far as the compensation is concerned, the Awards in question have been passed in accordance with the provisions of the New L.A. Act of 2013 only.
9. She urged before the Court that a package of compensation under the New L.A. Act of 2013 as contained in the First, Second and Third Schedules to the New L.A. Act of 2013 is envisaged and the total package of compensation includes the monetary compensation under the First Schedule (under Section 30(2) of the Act) depending upon the market value of the land in question, solatium etc., and Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Entitlements as provided in the Second Schedule (under Section 31(1), 38(1) & 105 (3) of the Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 14/33 Act) and also the provisions of the Infrastructural Amenities in the Third Schedule under Sections 32, 38(1) and 105(3) of the New L.A. Act of 2013 are all part of compensation package payable to the land losers under the New L.A. Act of 2013 which undoubtedly applies to the acquisitions made under the National Highways Act, 1956 also and to this effect only, the Central Government has issued the aforesaid Notification on 28/08/2015 only.
10. The learned counsel for the Respondent National Highways Authority of India however, denied that the remaining part of the New L.A. Act of 2013 except provisions relating to compensation, Rehabilitation and Resettlement also applies to acquisition for National Highways.
11. She submitted that the Awards for monetary compensation have already been passed in the present Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 15/33 writ petitions on 04/11/2017 and 08/11/2017 and for remaining part of compensation viz., for Rehabilitation etc., the process will be undertaken in the near future in accordance with law and that part of compensation may also be given to the present petitioners.
12. The learned counsel for the Respondent however vehemently submitted that the land acquisition in the present case deserves to be upheld and there is no ground made out to quash the Preliminary and Final Notifications in this regard as contended by the petitioners and the interim order granted by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court on 17/02/2017 against dispossession of the petitioners deserves to be vacated as the same is coming in the way of completing the said Project of widening of the National Highway No.48 in question.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 16/33
13. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
14. In the considered opinion of this Court, the present writ petitions of the petitioners are liable to be dismissed. The reasons are as follows.
15. Section 105 of the New L.A. Act of 2013 specifically excludes the applicability of the New L.A. Act of 2013 to the special enactments, 13 in number specified in the Fourth Schedule to the New L.A. Act of 2013. The National Highways Act, 1956 is at Sl.No.7 of the said Fourth Schedule, besides other enactments like Electricity Act of 2003, Railways Act of 1989 etc.
16. Sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the New L.A. Act of 2013 only enables the Central Government to extend the provisions "relating to determination of Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 17/33 compensation" in accordance with the First, Second and Third Schedule of the Act to even these special enactments. That is what has been done after couple of Ordinances issued by the Central Government earlier by the latest Notification dated 28/08/2015.
17. The provisions of Section 105 of the New L.A. Act of 2013 are quoted below for ready reference.
"Section 105. Provisions of this Act not to apply in certain case or to apply with certain modifications. -
(1) Subject to sub-section (3), the provisions of this Act shall not apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule.
(2) Subject to sub-section (2) of Section 106, the Central Government may, by notification, omit or add to any of the enactments specified in the Fourth Scheduled.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 18/33 (3) The Central Government shall, by notification, within one year from the date of commencement of this Act, direct that any of the provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule and rehabilitation and resettlement specified in the Second and Third Schedules, being beneficial to the affected families, shall apply to the cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule or shall apply with such exceptions or modifications that do not reduce the compensation or dilute the provisions of this Act relating to compensation or rehabilitation and resettlement as may be specified in the notification, as the case may be.
(4) A copy of every notification proposed to be issued under sub-section (3), shall be laid in draft before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 19/33 sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in disapproving the issue of the notification or both Houses agree in making any modification in the notification, the notification shall not be issued or, as the case may be, shall be issued only in such modified form as may be agreed upon by both the Houses of Parliament."
18. The Gazette Notification dated 28/08/2015 is quoted below for ready reference:
"MINISTRY OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT ORDER New Delhi, the 28th August, 2015 S.O.2368(E) - Whereas, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013) (hereinafter referred to Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 20/33 as the RFCTLARR Act) came into effect from 1st January, 2014;
And whereas, sub-section(3) of Section 105 of the RFCTLARR Act provided for issuing of notification to make the provisions of the Act relating to the determination of the compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement applicable to cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the RFCTLARR Act.
And whereas, the notification envisaged under sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the RFCTLARR Act was not issued, and the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Ordinance, 2014 (9 of 2014) was promulgated on 31st December, 2014, thereby, inter-alia amending Section 105 of the RFCTLARR Act to extend the provisions of the Act relating to the determination of the compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement to cases of land acquisition under the enactments Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 21/33 specified in the Fourth Schedule to the RFCTLARR Act;
And whereas, the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 (4 of 2015) was promulgated on 3rd April, 2015 to give continuity to the provisions of the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Ordinance, 2014;
And whereas, the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015 (5 of 2015) was promulgated on 30th May, 2015 to give continuity to the provisions of the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 (4 of 2015);
And whereas, the replacement Bill relating to the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 (4 of 2015) was referred to the Joint Committee of the Houses for examination and report and the same is pending with the Joint Committee;
As whereas, as per the provisions of article 123 of the Constitution, the RFCTLARR Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 22/33 (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015 (5 of 2015) shall lapse on the 31st day of August, 2015 and thereby placing the land owners at the disadvantageous position, resulting in denial of benefits of enhanced compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement to the cases of land acquisition under the 13 Acts specified in the Fourth Scheduled to the RFCTLARR Act as extended to the land owners under the said Ordinance;
And whereas, the Central Government considers it necessary to extend the benefits available to the land owners under the RFCTLARR Act to similarly placed land owners whose lands are acquired under the 13 enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule: and accordingly the Central Government keeping in view the aforesaid difficulties has decided to extend the beneficial advantage to the land owners and uniformly apply the beneficial provisions of the RFCTLARR Act, relating to the determination of compensation and Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 23/33 rehabilitation and resettlement as were made applicable to cases of land acquisition under the said enactments in the interest of the land owners;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 113 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (30 of 2013), the Central Government hereby makes the following Order to remove the aforesaid difficulties, namely:-
1. (1) This Order may be called the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015.
(2) It shall come into force with effect from the 1st day of September, 2015.
2. The provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 24/33 Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relating to the determination of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule, rehabilitation and resettlement in accordance with the Second Schedule and infrastructure amenities in accordance with the Third Schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisition under the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule to the said Act.
Sd/-
(F.No.13011/01/2014-LRD) K.P.KRISHNAN, Addl. Secy."
18. A bare reading of the provisions of law along with the Four Schedules to the New L.A. Act of 2013 with the Notification dated 28/08/2015 makes it very clear that the new general law of land acquisition under the New L.A. Act of 2013 is extended to apply to the land acquisitions under Special Enactments specified in Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 25/33 the Fourth Schedule is only to the extent of the provisions of the New L.A. Act of 2013 relating to the determination of the compensation which includes monetary compensation and indirect compensation in the form of Rehabilitation and Resettlement of the land losers under First, Second and Third Schedules to the Act.
19. The package of compensation in the First, Second and Third Schedules is compendium compensation and there is no dispute from the side of the Respondents that the relevant provisions of determination of compensation under these First, Second and Third Schedules will apply to the present case of the land acquisition by NHAI also.
20. That as a matter of fact, in view of this clear position of law, nothing survives in the present writ petitions as that is what the petitioners are claiming.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 26/33
21. There is no justifiable reason for quashing of the Preliminary and Final Notifications for acquisition much less the Awards passed by the concerned Special Land Acquisition Officer. Therefore, even while the Amendment Application may be allowed by this Court for taking on record the Awards in question but, there is no reason to quash the same, as the same are apparently issued in accordance with the First Schedule to the Act of 2013.
22. As far as the other components of compensation are concerned, the learned counsel for the Respondent National Highway Authority of India has already submitted before the Court that the process for the same will be undertaken by the concerned Respondents at a relevant time in future, but not making available that part of compensation under Second and Third Schedules immediately now, cannot Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 27/33 be a ground to quash the land acquisition itself in the present case putting in jeopardy the developmental work of widening of the National Highway which is of urgent and prime necessity, in view of the increasing congestion of traffic even on National Highways.
23. This Court does not find any force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the procedural aspects for undertaking the land acquisition proceedings as provided under the New L.A. Act of 2013 also will apply to the acquisition under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956. The position of law is on the contrary. Section 105 of the New L.A. Act of 2013 excludes the applicability of the New L.A. Act of 2013 to the acquisitions under the special enactments enumerated in the Fourth Schedule to the Act which includes National Highways Act, 1956. Only to the extent of providing relief by way of uniform Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 28/33 compensation, the Central Government has extended being empowered under Section 105(3) of the New L.A. Act of 2013, the provisions relating to compensation even to the acquisitions under these Special Enactments including the acquisitions under National Highways Act, 1956.
24. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that Social Impact Assessment study etc., were not carried out before hand, cannot be a ground to attack and challenge the land acquisition under National Highways Act, 1956 as those provisions of New L.A. of 2013 are not at all applicable to the acquisitions made under the National Highways Act, 1956.
25. If the petitioners - land owners are not satisfied with the monetary compensation awarded under the aforesaid Awards dated 04/11/2017 and Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 29/33 08/11/2017 they have a remedy by taking the matter further before the concerned authorities, viz. Civil Court under Sections 3-G and 3-H of the National Highways Act, 1956 which provides for dispute with regard to amount of compensation to be referred to the Arbitrator under section 3-G of the said Act. Therefore, the petitioners have an alternative remedy with regard to the compensation monetary or in the form of Rehabilitation and Resettlement to be undertaken by the Respondent - NHAI even before the concerned Authority/Court through the process of Arbitration under Section 3-G of the said Act.
26. The provisions of the New L.A. Act of 2013 do not override or render the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 otiose. On the contrary, they are harmonious and complimentary to each other with specified area of connectivity like the provisions relating Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 30/33 to compensation under the New L.A. Act of 2013 applying to National Highways Act, 1956 by virtue of delegated power given to the Central Government under Section 105(3) of the New L.A. Act of 2013.
27. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union of India (UOI) Vs. Kushala Shetty and others 2011 (12) SCC 69 held that the Courts are not at all equipped to decide upon the viability and feasibility of the particular Project and whether the particular alignment of National Highway would sub-serve the larger public interest or not and the court can nullify the acquisition of land only in rarest of rare cases if it is found to be ex facie contrary to the mandate of law and tainted with mala fides.
28. The relevant paragraph 24 of the said judgment is quoted below for ready reference:-
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 31/33 " 24. Here, it will be apposite to mention that NHAI is a professionally managed statutory body having expertise in the field of development and maintenance of National Highways. The projects involving construction of new highways and widening and development of the existing highways, which are vital for development of infrastructure in the country, are entrusted to experts in the field of highways. It comprises of persons having vast knowledge and expertise in the field of highway development and maintenance. NHAI prepares and implements projects relating to development and maintenance of National Highways after thorough study by experts in different fields.
Detailed project reports are prepared keeping in view the relative factors including intensity of heavy vehicular traffic and larger public interest. The Courts are not at all equipped to decide upon the viability and feasibility of the particular project and whether the particular alignment would sub serve the Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 32/33 larger public interest. In such matters, the scope of judicial review is very limited. The Court can nullity (sic! nullify) the acquisition of land and, in rarest of rare cases, the particular project, if it is found to be ex-facie contrary to the mandate of law or tainted due to mala fides. In the case in hand, neither any violation of mandate of the 1956 Act has been established nor the charge of malice in fact has been proved. Therefore, the order under challenge cannot be sustained."
29. In the present case, no such case has been set up by the petitioners nor any violation of the mandate of the National Highways Act of 1956 has been established by the petitioners.
30. In this view of the matter, the present writ petitions are disposed of with no order as to costs.
Date of Judgment: 16-04-2018 W.P.Nos.6466-6496/2017 C/W W.P.Nos.1443-1444/2017 Sri. G.C. Thippeswamy & others Vs. The Union of India & others 33/33
31. In view of the above, the interim order earlier granted by this Court dated 17/02/2017 stands vacated.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMV*