HYDERABAD: Ruling that petitioners were entitled to appropriate compensation if they properties were acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956, a division bench of the Telangana High Court comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice S. Nanda accepted a petition filed by the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) on acquisition of land.
In its petition, the NHAI said that it had issued a notification for acquisition of land for four-laning of the Sangareddy-Nanded-Akola section of NH 161. Responding to the notification, G Narasinga Rao and 10 others sought deviation from the alignment of the road from NH-9 to Mamidipalli village.
A single judge heard their writ petition which said that a modest cart track route already existed and instead of acquiring equal land on either side of this track, the NHAI had issued notices for acquisition of their entire properties. After hearing the petitioners, the single judge ordered the NHAI to acquire property of equal area on either side of the cart track route.
NHAI filed a review petition which was rejected. Following this, the NHAI filed an appeal with the division bench. After hearing arguments from both parties, the division bench concluded that road alignment should be determined by technical experts. Courts are not prepared to educate authorities on how to plan roads or National Highways, or which lands should and should not be purchased for such purposes.
In the case of national roads, a formal framework is in place, with remedy mechanisms built in for people impacted by property acquisition for road development, the bench said. The bench said that the scope of judicial review in such cases is quite limited and as a result, the single judge court was not justified in disposing of the writ petition in the manner that it did, and the review court likewise erred in dismissing the review petition. The division bench agreed and granted the NHAI’s writ appeals while dismissing the writ petition.