NHAI alone can decide on extent of land to be acquired: TS HC 

The division bench agreed and granted the NHAI’s writ appeals while dismissing the writ petition.

Published: 27th May 2022 06:29 AM  |   Last Updated: 27th May 2022 06:29 AM   |  A+A-

Telangana High Court (File Photo | EPS)

Telangana High Court (File Photo | EPS)

By Express News Service

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.


India Matters

Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.