Om Prakash Yadav v. Union Of India Through Secretary, Surface Transport And National

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.N. Pathak, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 / Union of India, Sri Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 to 5 / National Highway Authority of India as well as Sri R.K. Priyadarshi, learned A.C. to Additional Advocate General No. 1, who appears on behalf of respondent no. 6, 7 and

8. The present writ petition has been filed by the local residents of Araria / the petitioners, with a prayer to direct the respondents to construct the National Highway No. 57 running from Muzaffarpur to Purnia from Pillar No. 323+800 to Pillar No. 222+100 (about 1.5 Kilometer) passing through Narpatganj Bazar in accordance with Detailed Project Report (hereinafter referred to as “DPR”) and the road map prepared, approved and accepted by the National Highways Authority of India prior to acquisition of the land. It has further been prayed for issuance of direction to pay compensation amount of the acquired land at current and commercial rate besides other reliefs. It has been pleaded by the petitioners that Central Government has resolved to construct a Four Lane / Six Lane Highway No. 57 between Muzaffarpur and Purnia and accordingly DPR was prepared and Patna High Court CWJC No.21129 of 2012 (4) dt.08-02-2013 land was acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”). The petitioners have come out with a complaint that deviating from the DPR the National Highway is being constructed. It has further been pleaded to grant higher compensation. The petitioners have also prayed for providing a copy of concerned DPR. In this case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 2 to 5 / National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as “N.H.A.I.”). In the counter affidavit specific stand has been taken by the respondents that National Highway is being constructed strictly in accordance with DPR. It has further been indicated that allegation of the petitioners that N.H.A.I. is deviating from its original plan is false. Regarding the compensation amount it has been pleaded that if the parties are aggrieved, there is provision under Section 3G(5) of the Act for raising dispute. In this case after filing of the counter affidavit no rejoinder has been filed by the petitioners. At the time of argument it was emphasized by Sri Ranjan Kumar Singh, that the road is being constructed strictly as per DPR and there is no deviation. It further appears that the National Highway i.e. N.H. 57 from Muzaffarpur to Purnia is almost complete save and Patna High Court CWJC No.21129 of 2012 (4) dt.08-02-2013 except a small stretch regarding which dispute is being raised. Fact remains that for the public purpose in accordance with the National Highways Act steps were taken for acquiring the land and almost N.H. 57 has already been constructed. In view of uncontroverted stand taken by respondent no. 2 to 5 in their counter affidavit that they are not deviating from the DPR, the plea of the petitioners that deviation is being made is not sustainable in the eye of law. So far quantum of compensation amount is concerned, for that, there is already remedy available in the Act, and as such, the petitioners may not be allowed to invoke the writ jurisdiction. It is settled law that if there is statutory alternative remedy, one may not be allowed to invoke extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this court, and as such, I do not find any ground for interference in the matter. Moreover, in view of the fact that National Highway 57 is to be prepared in larger interest of the public, while dismissing the writ petition it would be appropriate to observe that respondents including National Highways Authority of India will take immediate steps so that, construction work is completed without any delay. If in execution of work the respondents-Authority feel apprehension of breach of peace, in that event, they can approach the concerned Superintendent of Police. The Patna High Court CWJC No.21129 of 2012 (4) dt.08-02-2013 Superintendent of Police, Araria, in such situation is directed to provide adequate Force. Before parting with this order it would be appropriate to note that this court has taken judicial note of the fact that in the State of Bihar at least two (02) National Highways i.e. N.H. 31 as well as N.H. 28 are not in appropriate condition. N.H. 31 in between Begusarai and Khagaria and N.H. 28 from Kesaria (Motihari) up to the border of Uttar Pradesh are in almost dilapidated condition. The court expects that National Highways Authority of India through its General Manager will examine the matter on priority basis so that, besides N.H. 57, N.H. 28 as well as N.H. 31 may be completed without any delay. With above observation the writ petition stands dismissed. However, it goes without saying that if the petitioners approach the authority concerned regarding copy of DPR for Pillar No. 323+800 to Pillar No. 222+100 the Authority would be at liberty to provide a copy of DPR on payment of requisite fee. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Sri Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for N.H.A.I. for compliance. Praful/- (Rakesh Kumar, J)