S.Ajay Nagendra Babu & Anr. v. National Highway Authority of India, Rep., by its Chairman, New Delhi

THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 17765 of 2010

O R D E R: The petitioners herein claim to be the absolute owners and possessors of dry land situated in Sy.No.97/1 of Gosala Village of Penamaluru Mandal and another extent of Ac.1.68 cents of land situated in Sy.No.336/2 of Edupugallu Village of Kankipadu Mandal of Krishna District. By notification dated

24.09.2009 published under Section 3A (1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’), the said lands were sought to be acquired for the purpose of widening/four laning, maintenance, management and operation of N.H.No.9 in the stretch of the road from K.M.0/00 to KM 20/650 (Vijayawada Machilipatnam Section), Krishna District and inviting objections from the persons interested within 21 days from the date of publication of the notification in the official gazette. The said notification was published in the Hindu daily, Vijayawada edition dated 22.10.2009. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed. It is contended in the writ petition that as the notification was published in the local dailies dated 22.10.2009 i.e. beyond the period of 21 days from the date of notification in the official gazette, it cannot be said that the persons interested are afforded any opportunity to raise their objections as contemplated under law and therefore, on that ground alone the impugned notification is liable to be set aside.

The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the language of Section 3A of the Act is in pari materia with the language employed in Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and therefore, the respondents are bound to issue individual notices to the land owners before taking any further steps pursuant to the notification under Section 3A (1) of the Act. It is vehemently contended that the impugned action of the respondents in seeking to acquire the lands in question without giving an opportunity of hearing to the affected parties is arbitrary and illegal. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, it is stated that the notification under Section 3A (1) of the Act is published in the gazette dated 24.09.2009 and the substance of the notification was published as required under Section 3A (3) of the Act in two local news papers namely the Hindu dated 22.10.2009 and Vartha daily dated 23.10.209.

It is further stated that as provided under Section 3C of the Act, 21 days time was given from the date of paper publication i.e. 23.10.2009 to all the interested persons and therefore, the contentions raised by the petitioners are untenable. Under Section 3A (1) of the Act, the Central Government if satisfied that for a public purpose any land is required for the building, maintenance, management or operation of a national highway, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare its intention to acquire such land. As per sub-section (2) of Section 3A of the Act, every notification shall give a brief description of the land. Sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Act requires that the competent authority shall cause the substance of such notification to be published in two local news papers, one of which will be in a vernacular language. As per Section 3C of the Act, any person interested in the land may, within 21 days from the date of publication of the notification under sub-section (1) of Section 3A, object to the use of the land for the purpose mentioned in that sub-section.

Sub-section (2) of Section 3C made it clear that every objection shall be made to the competent authority in writing setting out the grounds thereof and thereafter the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner, and after making such further enquiry, if any, pass an order either allowing or disallowing the objections. In the instant case, the notification under Section 3A(1) of the Act was published in the Gazette dated 24.09.2009 and the substance of the same was published in the local news papers dated 22.10.2009 and 23.10.2009. Though it is stated in the counter affidavit that while publishing the substance of the notification in the local dailies dated 22.10.2009, the objections were invited from the persons interested within 21 days from the date of paper publication, the copies of the paper publication have not been placed before this Court. Admittedly, the gazette notification was made on