High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction, or a Writ more particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Memo in R.C. No.C2l 1 6/201 6 dated 13.O9.2024 issued by the fifth respondent as being arbitrary, illegal, in violation of the procedure contemplated under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 FVw. Section 3G (5) of the National Highway Act, 1956 and set aside the same, and consequently direct the fifth respondent to initiate the arbitral proceedings by taking the claim petition on record and proceed with the same in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. .-7 ,. ; - "':""**=tr lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in sLrpport of the petition, the High Court m ry be pleased to direct the fifth respondent to take the claim petition of the Petitione.s on record and issue notice to the respondents in accordance wtth the provisions, of the Arbitratron and Conciliation Act. 1 99ti Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI L.VENKATESHWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 5: SRI GADI PRAVEI N KUMAR, Deputy Solicitc r General of lndia Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI M.RAMU, SC t:OR NHAI ', Counsel for the Respondent No.4: AGP FOR LAND ACQUtSITION The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.19763 of 2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for *re petitioners and Sri.Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 5, Sri.M.Ramu, learned standing counsel for NHAI appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondent No.4. With their consent ihis writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself.

2. This Writ petition is filed seeking thc following prayer:- "to fuclare the impugned Memo in R.C No.CU-16/2016 dated 13.09.2024 issued by the ffth respondent as being arbitrary, ilbgnl, in dolntion of tfu procedure contentplatud under the Arbitration and ConciLiation Act, 1996 R/to. Section 3G (5) of the Nntional Higfuuay Act, 1956 rruL xt tsifu the snne and consequently direct thr f.fth responfunt to initiate the nrbitral proceedings by tiling tfu claim petition on record nnd proeed zoith the same in accordancz utith tlu prouisiorts of the Arbitration ond Conciliation Act, -1996."

3. Brief facts stated in this writ Petition are that d-re petitioners claims to be the owners and possessors of Plots bearing No.1, admeasuring 210 Sq.yards and PIot No.2 admeasuring 403 Sq.yards, in Sy.No.108, situated at Kyadranpally Village, Mandamarri Mandal Mancherial District. The case of the petitioners is that pursuant to requisition dated 15.10.2016 made by respondent No.3, petitioners land was acquired for the purpose of laying National Highway No.363 and thereafter respondent No.4, under Section 3A (1) of National Highways Ac! 1956, initiatec{ land acquisition proceedings and issued notifications dated 09.08.2017 and 06.03.2019. Further case of the ...1',: '' \ir :aYt X 2 petitioners is that though acquisition noLifications were issrrecl, no individual notices were served on the petitioners for objections ard subsequent to notifications, an alvard was passed by respondent No.4, ho,,vever, copy of the award was also not served on the petitioners. Hence, the pt titioners rrlde lctter dated 19.12.2t119, rcquested respondent No.4 to issue a copy- of award. When the same was not served, the petitioners through Right t(, hrformation Act, obtained drc copy of award dated 18.10.2019, in the first ,,r,cck of l:uty,2O2O. Thereafter, tl.e petitioncrs came to know that the compcnration awarded bv drc respondent No.4 is not adequate as the true market valle prevailing in the subicct area vyas nlt rcflected in the award dated 18.10.201.). However, in the rneantime, Covid- L9 pandemic hit the entire country and a lock-down was imposcd and since the petitioners were also not given r Ln opportunity of hearing and raising objections, the petitioners addressr ti a lefter dated 0E.0.1.2022 and rt:quested rcspondent No.3 to appoint alt independent arbitrator for the purpose of determining proper compensa.ion ald when tl're sarne was nc,t considered, petitioners filed W.P.No.38753 of 2022 and this Corrt oide order dated 26.10.2022 had closed the writ petition r,,,ith the [ollor.r.ing observa tions :- "4. Whe,q the motter came up for considerotion, Sri Alh di Rovinder, learned ,ltand'ng Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3, b, ought to the notice o/ this Court that o Notification was already issued h;' the Ministry of Road Tro,lsport and Hip;hways Bearing No.S.O.l3n6(E), dated 21.03.2018, und the Distict Collectors of Mancher,al and the Komurambheen Asifabad were oppointed as arbinators Jb." tlrc purpose of Sub-s<'ction (5) o.f Section 3G of the Act, 1956, who shaL,' a.xercise the powars con/brrcd and perform the duties imposed on them,nd a copy of the said Notilicalion is also furnished to learned cot,nsel Jbr the petitione,"s. 5. In tha circwns'tances, the tyievance of the petitioners, as L gitdted. docs not survNe. 1-he writ peLition is accordingly closed granttng liberty to 3 the pelitioners lo approach the l)islricl Colleclors, who are nov' appointed as orbitrators under Section 3G (5) of the Act, 1956. There shall be no order os lo costs. "

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the order d,ated 26.1O.2022 in W.P.No.38753 of 2022, petitioners under Section 3G (5) of tlrc Act, 7956, fied, claim petition before respondent No.5 Thereaftcr respondent No.5 zridz impugned Memo bearing R.C.No.C2/16/ 2016 dated

1.3.09.2024, stated that the claim pctition has becn filed after lapse of (3) vears of period i.e., from the date of passing of award to the clate of claim of appellants and did not consit'lered thc claim petition. Thereafter, the pctitioners on 29.O9.2024 issued a notice to respondent No.5 and stated that thc Hon'ble Supreme Coulrt oide order dated 10.01.2022 ln Suo Motu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, while considering the then prevailing Covid-19 condition in the entire country had excluded the period between 15.03-2020 and 28-02.2022 for the purpose of limitation as may be prerribed under any general or special law in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding and further requested respondent No.5 to withdraw the memo dated 13-09.7024 and fix an early schedule for the arbitration proceeding. However, thc same is not considered. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners filed this writ petition.

5. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submits that at the time of acquisition proceedings, the petitioners were neither given an opportunity of giving obiections nor the petitioners were served with a copy of the award

18.10.2019. The petitioners had obtained the copy of award ttuough RTI Act, in the first week of July, 2020 and in view of the Covid-19 pandemic, the ,. , _._j.;;:.:..: 'i;b*; 4 petitioners zrirlz ft,tter dated 08.04.2022 requested for ap pointrnent of solc arbitrator arrd tl'oreafter in pursuant to the order dated 26.70.2022 tn W.P.No.38753 o('.1022, petitioners under Section 3G (5) of he Ac! 1955, filed claim petition bcfr u'e respondent No.5 on 03.01.2024.

6. The main 1;rievance of the petitioners is that inspit,,ol clarification in notice datcd 29.09.2024 with respect to Iimitation aspect, rc.iPondcnt No.5 had not withdrzrwn in-rpugned Memo bearing R.C.No.C 2/ 16/ 2016 ctated

73.09.2021 artd not scl-rcdult,d any date for hearing the cla rn petition, hence, prav tlris Corrt t( st't asic{c thc impugncd memo dated -13 (l9.2O2l and direct the respondent No 5 to commence hearing of petitioners cla rr petition.

7. Learned counsel appearing for respondents pray .his Court to pass appropriate orclt'r,;.

8. Hcar,l anr pctused the material available on recor,l. lJpon perusal of the rccorc{, it is noticed tha t the Hon'ble Supreme Cour t in suo noto writ petihon No.3 of 2020 had dealt with the limitation aspect a rd i,ide ordcr clated

10.0-1.2022 hzrcl exr:luded the period between 15.03.2020 anr I 28.08.2022 for the purpose of Iimitation and the same was intimated to respor.dcrlt No.5 through notice dated 29.09.2024. Inspite of the same, respondent N,r.5, while deciding the rnaintairrabili tv of the petitioners claim petitiory fail cd to exclude the periocl betwrcn 1:'.03.2020 arrd 28.O8.2022, and issued memo dated 73.09.2024. Hence, this (lourt tleems it appropriate to set aside the imp rgned memo dated

13.O9.2024. 5

9. Havhg considered the above facts and circumstances and in the Iight of observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto writ pehtion No.3 of 2020 dated 70.01..2022, the impugncd Memo bearing R.C.No.C2/16/2016 dated 73.O9.2024 is set aside and.accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.5 to initiate the arbitral proceedings and after giving a fair opporhrnity of hearing to the parties, the respondent No.5 shall pass appropriatc orders, strictly in accordance with law.

10. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposeri of Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to \ SD/ H S. GOWRI SHANKAR S TANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// S ION OFFICER To 1 2 3 4 7 o

9. 10 PSK GJP ort Highways, New The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Road T Delhi. The Chairman, National Highways Authority of lndia, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, G-5 and 6, Sector-10, Dwaraka, New Delhi-1 1 0 075 The Project Director, National Highways Authority of lndia, Ministry of Road Transport and !-lighways, G-5 and 6, Sector-1 0, Dwaraka, New Delhi-1 10 075 The Joint Collector and Competent Authority, For Land Acquisition, N.H. 363, Mancherial Distric, Telangana. The District Collector/Sole Arbitrator, (Appointed by the Central Government for purpose of Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956), Mancherial District, lntegrated District Officers Complex, Mancherial, Telangana-504 208. One CC to SRI L.VENKATESHWAR RAO, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia [oPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR LAND ACOUISITION, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI M.RAMU, SC FOR NHAI [OPUC] Two CD Copies q HIGH COURT DATED:1010712025 ORDER WP.No.19763 of 2025 I ) I ) l!'.-' 1,. -- i ? s[P 2!25 ,i i ." i\'. -.-, '' ..:., <{ ...,---'',,...--.. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS e