Reshma Dungdung v. Union of India & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
…. Opposite Parties Mr. Manmaya Kumar Dash, Additional Standing Counsel Mr. Ajit Patnaik, Advocate (for Opposite Party No.2) CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 28.11.2025 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. Petitioner in this writ application prays for restraining the Order No.
National Highway Authorities from encroaching upon his land for the project for expansion of National Highway 143-H.
Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that pursuant to an earlier notification under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for brevity, “the Act”) for expansion of National Highway under NH No. 143-H, the Petitioner had filed objection, but the said notification lapsed as the 3D notification could not be made within the stipulated time. Further, a notification under Section 3-A of the Act was published on 12th November, 2024 under Annexure-2, wherein Plot No. 1019/1252, 1019/1298 and 1019/1303 under Khata No. 101/72 in Mouza Litibeda under Rajgangpur Tahasil in the district of Sundergarh have been proposed to be acquired. Objecting to the same, the Petitioner filed objections under Section 3-C of the Act. Till date the said objection has not been disposed of. However, the National Highway Authorities are contemplating to take over possession and construct the road over on his land. Hence, finding no other alternative, the present writ petition has been filed.
Mr. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the National Highway Authority referring to the counter affidavit submits that although the objection under Annexure 6 filed under Section 3-C of the Act has not yet been disposed of, but there is a proposal to change the alignment of NH 143-H. Thus, the land of the Petitioner may not be required for construction of road. Consequently, it may not be required to dispose of the objection of the Petitioner. He further submits that objections were filed on 26th December, 2024 and immediately thereafter the writ petition was filed on 10th March, 2025. Thus, the writ petition is pre-mature.
Taking note of the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that pursuant to the notification under section 3-A of the Act under Annexure-2, the Petitioner has filed an objection under Annexure-6 on 26th December,
It is stated by Mr. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the National Highway Authorities that no decision has yet been taken on the objection.
This Court, therefore, disposes of the writ petition with a direction that before publication of notification under Section 3- D of the Act, if any, the objection filed by the Petitioner on 26th December, 2024 shall be taken into consideration giving him an opportunity of hearing. (K.R. Mohapatra) Subhalaxmi Judge (Savitri Ratho) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHALAXMI PRIYADARSHANI SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 04-Dec-2025 13:33:59
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.