Patna High Court - Orders
Pratijnya, Social Organisation vs The Union Of India on 19 January, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8093 of 2019
======================================================
Pratijnya, Social Organisation
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India & Ors.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2988 of 2022
======================================================
Vikas Kumar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India & Ors.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8093 of 2019)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ansul Madhav, Advocate
Mr. Nikhil Singh, Advocate
Mr. Satyendra Prasad Singh, Advocate
Mr. Shailesh Anand, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocate
Ms. Alka Singh, Advocate
For UOI : Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, C.G.C.
Mr. Girish Nandan Abhishek, J.C. to CGC
Mr. Ankur Apurv Singh, J.C. to CGC
Mr. Pallav, J.C. to Kumar Priya Ranjan
Mr. Vibhuti Kumar, Advocate
For the NHAI : Dr. K. N. Singh, A.S.G.
Mr. Devansh Shankar Singh, J.C. to ASG
Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.C. to A.S.G.
Mr. Amarjeet, J.C. to A.S.G.
Ms. Anjali Kumari, Advocate
Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, J.C. to A.S.G.
Ms. Prakritita Sharma, A.C. to A.S.G.
Mr. Gaurav Govinda, J.C. to A.S.G.
Mr. Gaurav Kumar, J.C. to A.S.G.
Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, AC to AAG-4
For the Intervenors : Mr. Rajendra Narain, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Nikhil Singh, Advocate
Patna High Court CWJC No.8093 of 2019(72) dt.19-01-2023
2/5
Mr. Deepak Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the G.M.C : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Advocate
For the Concessionaire : Mr. Ray Saurabh Nath, Advocate
Mr. Amresh Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Manjari Nath, Advocate
Ms. Shalini Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate
Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
For the NTPC : Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the respondents : Mr. Manish Gupta, Advocate
Mr. Ray Saurabh Nath, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Jain, M.D., M/s J.S.P. Project
Pvt. Ltd. (In Person)
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2988 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikas Kumar (In Person)
For Union of India : Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan, CGC
Ms. Pallav, J.C to Kumar Priya Ranjan
For the NHAI : Dr. K. N. Singh, A.S.G.
Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.C to ASG
Mr. Amarjeet, J.C to A.S.G
Ms. Anjali Kumari, Advocate
Ms. Prakritita Sharma, A.C. to ASG
Mr. Gaurav Govinda, J.C. to ASG
Mr. Devansh Shankar Singh, J.C. to ASG
Mr. Vivek, J.C. to ASG
Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anjani Kumar, AAG-4
Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, SC 26
Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, A.C. to AAG-4
Mr. Subodh Kumar, A.C. to SC-26
For the NTPC : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Contractor : Mr. Ray Saurabh Nath, Advocate
Mr. Amresh Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Manjari Nath, Advocate
Ms. Shalini Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate
Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
For the DFCC : Ms. Tiwari Shwetketu, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
72 19-01-2023Today again, Shri Rajendra Narain, learned senior Patna High Court CWJC No.8093 of 2019(72) dt.19-01-2023 3/5 counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenors, invites attention of the fact that the authorities have yet not released the amount so determined under Section-3(G) of National Highway Act, 1956 and information, specific in nature, stands furnished vide 1st supplementary affidavit dated 14.12.20222, filed on behalf of the intervenors.
Without going into the correctness thereof, we direct the authorities to forthwith, even where cases for enhancement are pending, at least release the amount so determined by the competent authority due and payable to the land-owners as compensation for acquisition of the land. Needless to add, such amount has to be as is so determined under Section-3(G) of the National Highway Act, 1956. This direction is confined and specific to D.L.A.O., Jehanabad, who shall file his personal affidavit in response to the averments made by the intervenors.
At this stage, Dr. K.N. Singh, learned A.S.G., and Shri Anjani Kumar, learned AAG-4, state that, perhaps, the amount is not being released on account of non-compliance of the statutory formalities.
It is clarified that in all cases formalities would be completed within a period of one week from today, if not Patna High Court CWJC No.8093 of 2019(72) dt.19-01-2023 4/5 already so done. Upon compliance of such formalities, the amount be released forthwith directly into the bank account(s) of the rightful claimants.
Needful be positively done within a period of three weeks. This direction shall apply even with respect to those parties who have not yet approached this Court, particulars whereof shall be supplied to Shri Alok Kumar Rahi, learned counsel for the State.
Let the contractor(s) file latest affidavit indicating the status of the progress made; deployment of men and machinery at different places; and the progress made since the last date of inspection carried out by the local commissioners.
Needful be positively done within a period of one week from today.
List on 30.01.2023.
Learned A.S.G. points out the difficulties which, perhaps, are coming in the way of early completion of the work.
It appears that local people who have no concern whatsoever either with the land or with the construction are unnecessarily opposing the same.
We have already directed the concerned District Magistrates and the Sr.S.Ps/S.Ps. to provide adequate force Patna High Court CWJC No.8093 of 2019(72) dt.19-01-2023 5/5 enabling the National Highway Authority of India for having the work executed and completed by the contractor(s) within the time-line undertaken by the contractor(s). We reiterate such directions.
Shri Anjani Kumar, learned AAG-4, undertakes to inform the concerned authorities during the course of the day.
It is argued that, perhaps, the respondents are not maintaining complete record as is so statutorily required to be done with respect to the deployment of men and machinery.
We see no reason as to why the contractor(s) shall not do so. In fact, we direct the contractor(s) to maintain the daily deployment register of each one of its employees engaged in undertaking the project, which shall be made available to the local commissioners for perusal on their next visit, as and when so directed by this Court.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) K.C.Jha/-DKS U