High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141276-DB Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6695 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Gupta Respondent :- Competent Authority (Land Acquisition)/Sub-Divisional Magistrate And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohit Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranjal Mehrotra Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Shri Mohit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri F.A. Ansari, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents and Shri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI"). 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for quashing the impugned demolition notice dated 13.02.2025 as well as impugned notices dated 13.12.2024 and 02.09.2024 issued by respondent no.1. 3. It appears from the record that the National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI") had proposed to acquire the land for expansion of National Highway from four lane to six lane from Chakeri to Allahabad Section (507.470 km. to 598.073 km.). Accordingly, a notification under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short "Act") was issued on 17.12.2019 and published in two daily newspapers "Amar Ujala and Hindustan Times" on 05.01.2020. Thereafter, notification under Section 3-D of the Act was issued on 22.5.2020 and published in the same newspapers on 01.06.2020. In the said proceeding, the petitioner's holding was also affected and adequate compensation under the Act was prepared on 25.06.2021 to the tune of Rs.57,88,850 and the same was also paid to the petitioner through RTGS. The respondents had issued various notices to the petitioner indicating therein that the petitioner had not removed the part of his house, which is situated over Gata No.417. Initially, objection of the petitioner had also been considered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Fatehpur on 13.12.2024, wherein it had been indicated that, inspite of compensation, till date the petitioner had not removed the part of his encroachment. Thereafter, the impugned notices dated 02.09.2024, 13.12.2024 and impugned demolition notice dated 13.02.2025 had been issued, which are subject matter of challenge in the instant proceeding. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land/ part of the house of the petitioner was also demarcated and acquired by NHAI and, initially, 2 WRIC No. 6695 of 2025 compensation had also been assessed on higher side but, later on, the respondents had reduced the compensation from 1,15,77,700/- to 57,88,850/- on the ground that certain part of the land/ house was under encroachment and was illegally constructed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the encroached area had already been demolished/ vacated by the petitioner himself and on the spot, road is already widened and even the drainage system had also been constructed. At present, the petitioner is residing in the remaining portion of the property on which the petitioner is having absolute title. It is alleged that in an arbitrary manner, the respondents are inclined to demolish the valid construction of the petitioner, wherein he is running small business and which is the only source of his livelihood. It is requested that the respondents may be restrained from carrying out demolition. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for NHAI has resisted the relief and submitted that in the instant matter the possession was taken in the year 2020, adequate compensation had already been disbursed to the petitioner way back and, till date, he had not agitated the quantum of compensation under the Act. The submission is that impugned notices are valid as admittedly the petitioner, inspite of receiving the compensation, had not removed the encroachment, which is admittedly existing over the acquired land. He submits that the land had been acquired for expansion of road and the alleged construction is to be removed. The spot inspection was also carried out by NHAI along with the revenue officials on 20.03.2025. Even though the petitioner had carried out some demolition but admittedly at present there is encroachment of 109.71 sq. mtr. 6. Learned counsel for NHAI has produced the letter sent by the General the Competent Manager (Tech.)-cum-Project Director of NHAI Authority/ Sub Divisional Magistrate (Sadar), Fatehpur along with map, which is taken on record and a copy of the same has also been given to learned counsel for the petitioner. It is contended that the encroachment is at very critical place, wherein there is every likelihood of accident, the safety and security of public at large is at stake and, as such, no indulgence is required in the instant matter. to 7. Learned Standing Counsel has also placed the detailed instructions along with the spot inspection report sent by the Competent Authority (Land Acquisition)/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Fatehpur, which is also taken on record and a copy of the same has been given to learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that, admittedly, the petitioner had been paid entire compensation but he had not removed the encroached construction. Even the alleged construction near the National Highway is also liable to be removed as the same is hit by U.P. Roadside Control Act. He submits that 3 WRIC No. 6695 of 2025 there is encroachment of 9.2 x 4.8 mtr. on the National Highway, which is to be removed at the earliest, otherwise there is every likelihood that the construction may cause grave danger to public at large. He submits that the writ petition is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed. 8. Heard rival submissions and perused the record. 9. It is not in dispute that the NHAI had carried out expansion of national highway from four lane to six lane. Notifications in this regard under the Act were issued in the year 2019-20. Nothing is brought on record to indicate that the petitioner had ever agitated the issue qua quantum of compensation under the Act. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner qua adequate compensation is devoid of merit in the absence of any such challenge under the Act. As such, at this belated stage, we are not inclined to accord any relief qua the compensation, which was paid to the petitioner in the year 2021. 10. Detailed instructions have been provided by the NHAI and the State respondents indicating therein that there is alleged construction, which was liable to be removed by the petitioner. Even though the petitioner himself has removed certain portion of encroachment but, at present, we are not in a position to adjudicate whether for entire portion for which the petitioner is having right, title or claim, the compensation has been paid. The said disputed fact cannot be pressed in writ jurisdiction under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. However, considering the impugned notices, we find that one more indulgence may be extended to the petitioner. To subserve the substantial justice, we observe that the actual demarcation is to be carried out by the revenue officials in the presence of NHAI officials and the petitioner. revenue officials 11. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with observation that the District Magistrate, Fatehpur shall depute Sub- Divisional Magistrate along with to make spot measurement/ survey in the presence of the petitioner and the NHAI officials within three weeks. After measurement/ demarcation, in case, it is found that the petitioner has encroached upon the land of National Highway, the petitioner shall remove the encroached construction in other two weeks, failing which the Authority will be at liberty to remove the said constructions immediately, thereafter. 12. For a period of five weeks, parties shall maintain status quo as on today qua the property in dispute. Order Date :- 19.8.2025/SP/ Digitally signed by :- SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad