Patna High Court - Orders
Om Prakash Yadav vs The Union Of India & Ors on 14 February, 2013
Author: Rakesh Kumar
Bench: Rakesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10198 of 2012
======================================================
1. Dharmendra Kumar
2. Vijay Prakash Yadav
3. Raj Kishore Kumar
4. Jitendra Kumar
All sons of Sri Ram Chandra Yadav resident of Mohallah- Noorpur, P.S.-
Malsalami, Patna City, Town And District- Patna
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary , Ministry Of Road
Transport And Highways, Government Of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
3. The National Highway Authority Of India Through it's Chairman-Cum-
Secretary, Ministry Of Shipping, Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
4. The Project Director , National Highway Authority Of India, D-36,
Shree Krishna Puri, Patna
5. The District Magistrate, Patna
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer Cum Competent Authority, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10276 of 2012
======================================================
Munnu Prasad Yadav, son of Late Gauri Shankar Prasad, resident of
Mohallah - Noorpur, P.S. - Malsalami, Patna City, Town and District -
Patna.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport
and Highways, Government of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Government of India, New Delhi.
3. The National Highway Authority of India through its Chairman cum
Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways,
Government of India, New Delhi.
4. The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, D-36,
Shree Krishna Puri, Patna.
5. The District Magistrate, Patna.
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer cum Competent Authority,
Patna.
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11179 of 2012
======================================================
Brij Nandan Thakur son of Late Sona Thakur resident of Village-
Patna High Court CWJC No.10198 of 2012 (14) dt.14-02-2013
2/6
Sabalpur, P.S.- Didarganj, Patna City, District-Patna, At Present Residing
At Mohallah- Khajpura, Akashwani Road, P.S.- Shastri Nagar, Town And
District- Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road
Transport And Highways, Government Of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
3. The National Highway Authority Of India Through it's Chairman-Cum-
Secretary , Ministry Of Shipping, Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
4. The Project Director, National Highway Authority Of India, D-36,
Shree Krishna Puri, Patna
5. The District Magistrate, Patna
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer Cum Competent Authority, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10283 of 2012
======================================================
Suresh Prasad, Son Of Late Jugal Gope , Resident Of Mohallah-
Rikabganj, P.S.- Malsalami, Patna City, Town And District- Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport
And Highways, Government Of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
3. The National Highway Authority Of India Through It's Chairman-Cum-
Secretary, Ministry Of Shipping, Road Transport And Highways.
Government Of India, New Delhi
4. The Project Director, National Highway Authority Of India, D-36, Shree
Krishna Puri, Patna
5. The District Magistrate, Patna
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer Cum Competent Authority, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14095 of 2012
======================================================
Mostt. Sita Devi Wife Of Late Gauri Shankar Mehta , Resident Of
Mohallah - Katra Bazar, P.S. - Malsalami , Patna City, Town And District -
Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport
Patna High Court CWJC No.10198 of 2012 (14) dt.14-02-2013
3/6
And Highways, Government Of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
3. The National Highway Authority Of India Through It's Chairman-Cum-
Secretary, Ministry Of Shipping , Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
4. The Project Director, National Highway Authority Of India, D-36, Shree
Krishna Puri, Patna
5. The District Magistrate, Patna
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer Cum Competent Authority, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15955 of 2012
======================================================
Mostt. Ajnabi Devi, Wife Of Late Mukhlal Yadav, Resident Of Mohallah-
Rikabganj, P.S.- Malsalami, Patna City, Town And District- Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport
And Highways, Government Of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
3. The National Highway Authority Of India Through It's Chairman-Cum-
Secretary, Ministry Of Shipping, Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
4. The Project Director, National Highway Authority Of India, D- 36,
Shree Krishna Puri, Patna
5. The District Magistrate, Patna
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer Cum Competent Authority, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.123 of 2013
======================================================
Om Prakash Yadav son of Sri Sugriv Lal Yadav resident of Mohallah-
Rikabganj, P.S.- Malsalami, Patna City, Town And District- Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary , Ministry Of Road
Transport And Highways, Government Of India, New Delhi
2. The Deputy Secretary , Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
3. The National Highway Authority Of India Through It's Chairman-Cum-
Secretary , Ministry Of Shipping, Road Transport And Highways,
Government Of India, New Delhi
4. The Project Director , National Highway Authority Of India, D-36, Shree
Krishna Puri, Patna
Patna High Court CWJC No.10198 of 2012 (14) dt.14-02-2013
4/6
5. The District Magistrate, Patna
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer Cum Competent Authority, Patna
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CWJC No.10198 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Tiwari
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto AG
(In CWJC No.10276 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Tiwari
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishor AAG1
(In CWJC No.11179 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Tiwari
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raghib Ahsan (Asst.SG)
(In CWJC No.10283 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishor AAG1
(In CWJC No.14095 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto AG
(In CWJC No.15955 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto AG
(In CWJC No.123 of 2013)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Kumar Anand
Mr. Dharmendra Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto, AG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
14 14-02-2013Heard Sri Keshav Srivastava, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners in all the aforesaid writ petitions, Sri S.N. Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent / Union of India as well as National Highways Authority of India, Sri Krishna Chandra, learned A.C. to Advocate General and Sri R.K. Priyadarshi, learned A.C. to Additional Advocate General No. 1.
Since in all the aforesaid cases similar questions were Patna High Court CWJC No.10198 of 2012 (14) dt.14-02-2013 5/6 raised, accordingly, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. In sum and substance the petitioners have prayed for quashing of notification issued under Section 3A(1) of National Highways Act, 1956 contained in Annexure - "1" i.e. Gazette of India as well as notification issued under Section 3D(1) vide Annexure - "2". By notification (Annexure 1) the National Highways Authority had intended for acquiring certain lands for widening /Four Laning of N.H. 30. Subsequently, declaration under Section 3D was also made. In some cases petitioners are aggrieved by subsequent notification issued under Section 3A(1) for acquiring further lands. Main grievance of petitioners is that though land of petitioners are commercial / residential, same has been treated as agricultural land, and as such, according to them, they are entitled to get compensation amount for their land treating the same as commercial / residential.
In this case counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as N.H.A.I.). It has been pleaded that dispute regarding amount of compensation, can well be decided by the Arbitrator. It was submitted by Sri Pathak that for such dispute there is specific provision under Section 3G(5) in the National Highways Act, Patna High Court CWJC No.10198 of 2012 (14) dt.14-02-2013 6/6 which speaks for deciding the issue by the Arbitrator. The court is of the opinion that the dispute as to whether land in question is commercial / residential or agricultural may not be adjudicated by this court while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India since this pertains to disputed question of fact. Moreover, since in the Act itself there is provision for deciding the issue by the Arbitrator, this court may not interfere in the matter.
Accordingly, aforesaid writ petitions are hereby disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to avail remedy under Section 3G(5). If such dispute is raised before the Authority concerned, the court expects that Authority concerned without being prejudiced with this order may examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
It goes without saying that if the matter is referred to the Arbitrator, the claim of petitioners as to whether the lands in question are commercial / residential or agricultural may also be examined by the Arbitrator.
With above observation and direction all aforesaid writ petitions are disposed of.
(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/-