M/S Maheshwari Medical And Genera Store vs State Of Telangana

Since the cause of action in all these writ petitions is arising due to the widening of the existing NH-363 between Mancherial to Chandrapur, all the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

Seeking to call for the records pertaining to proceedings in case No.F1/74/2019 dated 06.06.2020 of respondent No.2 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary, Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021 are filed.

Facts leading to filing of Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021, in a nutshell, are that the petitioners herein are the owners of their respective properties situated at Singapur Village, Naspur Mandal, Mancherial District. For the purpose of widening the existing NH-363, the respondent authorities have issued a paper publication under Section 3-GH(3) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short ‘NH Act’). In the said notification, names of certain persons and properties were mentioned and objections were called for asking to produce records and to appear before the respondent authorities. Thereafter, the authorities have again issued a notice in Rc.No.C2/16/Singapur/ 2016, dated 02.12.2019, asking to submit certain documents. It is the specific case of the petitioners that before passing the award, the respondents have not conducted any survey and have identified the properties mechanically and decided the amounts without any basis. Thereafter, the petitioners have approached the authorities by way of a representation and raised their objections. However, without considering the objections, the official respondents have proceeded in the matter and passed the final award vide Award Proc.No.C2/NH-363/16/Singapur/2016 dated 30.11.2019. Aggrieved by the same, Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021 are filed.

W.P. No.24151 of 2021 is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities in blocking the road by digging trenches in the middle of the road towards R.K. 6 Kotha road, Krishna Colony, Ramakrishnapur of Naspur Mandal, Mancherial District, and that the authorities are not considering the representation dated 20.09.2021.

Further, aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities in trying to dispossess the petitioners without including their properties in the land acquisition proceedings and providing Rehabilitation and Resettlement benefits to them, without considering the representations/objections, W.P. Nos.24188 and 25482 of 2021 are filed.

In Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021, this Court passed interim orders directing the respondent authorities not to dispossess the petitioners from their respective properties.

In Writ Petition Nos.24188 and 25482 of 2021, this Court granted interim direction to the respondent authorities to consider the representations of the writ petitioners.

Seeking to vacate the said interim orders passed in Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24188, 24749, 25482, 26933 and 26938 of 2021, separate vacate applications have been filed along with counter affidavits by the Joint Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer as well as the Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, respectively, mainly contending that the Project Director, NHAI, has submitted a requisition vide letter dated 15.10.2016 for acquisition of certain lands for four laning of NH-363 between Mancherial to Chandrapur. The Joint Collector, Mancherial, was appointed as the competent authority for acquisition of lands. Notification under Section 3-A of the NH Act was issued on 14.07.2017 in Sakshi (Telugu) and The Hindu (English) daily newspapers on 09.08.2017 inviting objections. As no objections were received within the stipulated time, again the second notification under Section 3-A of the NH Act was issued on 04.01.2018 inviting objections. However, no objections were received. Thereafter, notification under Section 3(D)(1) of the NH Act was published in Gazette No.711 dated 26.02.2018. Once, the notification under Section 3D of the NH Act is published in Gazette, the lands under acquisition shall vest absolutely with the Central Government fee from all encumbrances. It is further stated that notification under Section 3(G) of the NH Act was published in news papers on 10.03.2018. Thereafter, the competent authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) has passed an award for acquisition of structures vide Award dated 13.05.2019 in respect of the lands of Singapur Village. Thereafter, notice dated 02.12.2019 has been issued to all the 179 awardees to take compensation. Notification under Section 3(E) of the Act has also been issued in daily newspapers on 06.12.2019 informing the parties to collect the compensation amount as per award. It is specifically averred that as the subject lands are recorded in the name of Government (Forest land), no compensation was awarded in respect of the land. However, the structures were notified in the name of the petitioners and during the award enquiry, all the writ petitioners have attended the award enquiry and produced house tax receipt and electricity bill and therefore the value for the structures have been awarded to the petitioners, who are the occupiers. As the land affected under acquisition is notified in the name of the Government, the petitioners are only the encroachers and therefore the value for the structures raised on the encroached land has been awarded. Thereafter, the petitioners have neither approached the authorities nor submitted their bank account details to enable the respondents to pay the compensation amounts. Therefore, compensation amount was not paid to the petitioners. It is the case of the respondents NHAI that as the land acquired for the subject project is the land belonging to Forest Department, compensation amount of Rs.116.83 crores has already been paid to the Forest Department.

It is further stated that as the State Government has agreed to rehabilitate 201 families living in Singapur & Thallapally Rehabilitation colony of Naspur Mandal, in the lands of the Singareni Collieries Company Limited by allotting house sites at the rate of 80 sq. yards per family and to that effect Memo No.19593/Assn.I(1)/2020-1 dated 12.11.2020 was issued by the Chief Secretary, Government of Telangana, to the Collector, Mancherial District. It is further pleaded that four lane road widening project is a time bound project and the work was commenced in August, 2020 and the same has to be completed within a period of two years i.e. by 16.08.2022. Due to the interim orders granted by this Court, the authorities are unable to proceed with the works. The road widening project is taken up for the benefit of the general public, commuters and in the interest of large public. Any delay in competition of work would cause huge loss to the Government Exchequer. Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the writ petitions.

A reply has been filed in Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021 stating that in the year 1978 itself, the Forest department has de-notified the subject land and allotted the same to Singareni Collieries Company Limited, through which the petitioners have obtained the subject land. It is further stated that there is no scrap of paper evidencing that the subject land belongs to Forest department. That the official respondents have not followed any procedure contemplated under the National Highways Act, 1956 or the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Hence, it is prayed to allow the writ petitions.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, Sri Alishetty Laxminarayana, learned Standing Counsel for NHAI, and Sri J.Sreenivasa Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Singareni Collieries Company Limited. Perused the material on record including the documents filed by the petitioners.

Coming to Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021, admittedly, the petitioners have not filed any title document or revenue record to show that the subject lands are private patta lands or that they are having any right, title or interest over the same. Except for structure on the land, no other documents are filed by the petitioners to show that they are the owners of the subject lands.

Though a specific plea was taken by the petitioners that the respondents have not followed due process of law in the process of land acquisition, a perusal of the counter affidavit filed by NHAI as well as the documents filed along with the said counter shows that the official respondents have scrupulously followed the procedure contemplated under the Act. Initially, the Notification under Section 3-A of the Act was issued on 04.01.2018 and the same was published in the local news papers on 11.01.2018 giving 21 days time for filing objections, if any, by the land owners/interested persons. However, no objections were received from the land owners/interested persons within the time stipulated. Therefore, Notification under Section 3D(1) of the Act was issued and the same was published in Gazette No.711 dated 26.02.2018. Thereafter, the Notification under Section 3(G) of the Act was published in the daily news papers on 10.03.2018 informing all the land owners to attend the enquiry on 16.03.2018 at Tahsil Office, Naspur. The persons, who were found to be in possession of the structures as well as fruit bearing trees, were awarded compensation for the same. As the subject lands were claimed by the Forest Department, land value was not awarded to the petitioners.

Once it is established by the respondent authorities that the procedure as contemplated under the Act has been followed scrupulously and necessary notifications as contemplated under the Act were issued, the petitioners cannot contend that the provisions of the Act were not followed. Moreover, the record reveals that the notifications and publications were published both in the official Gazette as well as in the local news papers. Therefore, the contention of the petitioners that the procedure was not followed is without substance and contrary to the record. Once, the notification is published, it is for the petitioners to file their objections well within the time stipulated in those notifications, but, they cannot seek any relief to consider their objections after the statutory period had elapsed. The petitioners have not disputed these notifications published in the Gazette or the news papers, moreover, once the Award is passed, the direction of again giving an opportunity to the petitioners to have their objections considered does not arise unless the petitioners are able to show that the statutory procedure was not followed at all, which they have failed to do so.

Even though a specific stand has been taken by the official respondents in their counter affidavits that the subject lands are Forest lands, the petitioners did not choose to file any documents to rebut the same. Unless and until, the petitioners file proof of having title or documents to show that the subject lands are private patta lands or that the Government has granted pattas to them, it cannot be said that they are the title holders of the subject lands. Even though much reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners to state that the petitioners are the owners of the respective properties, admittedly, the property tax receipts do not contain the area of the land or the structure. It is well accepted fact that the property tax receipts will not confer any title upon the petitioners, at the most, they can be treated as evidence of possession. That apart, the petitioners have filed copies of ownership certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat. But, it is to be seen that issuance of the said ownership certificate by the Gram Panchayat is only for the purpose of collection of tax and does not confer any title to them. A perusal of the ownership certificate reveals that no details are shown in the said certificate as to under what authority the same are given or for what purpose. The petitioners have not filed any sale deed or revenue record in support of their right, title or interest. Hence, the same is not binding on the authorities, much less, the Revenue and Forest authorities. Even though the petitioners have stated that the structures of the petitioners are varying in size and therefore the fixation of the compensation for the structures at an uniform rate is arbitrary, illegal and bad, the petitioners have not filed any documents in support of the said contention also. Thus, on this ground also, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances, and since Award has already been passed and the compensation amount was also deposited with the competent authorities under the Act, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief prayed by the petitioners in Writ Petition Nos.18201, 18461, 22024, 24749, 26933 and 26938 of 2021. In case, these petitioners have any grievance with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded for the structures, they are free to approach the competent authority and file an application under Section 3G (5) of the Act, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the said application shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

Insofar as W.P. Nos.24188 and 25482 of 2021 filed by the petitioners seeking alternative accommodation are concerned, as seen from the documents filed in support of the counter affidavit, the Government vide Memo dated 12.11.2020 in principle has agreed for providing alternative accommodation and has directed the Collector, Mancherial, to furnish necessary proposals for rehabilitation of the 201 families living in Singapur and Thallapally Rehabilitation Colony of Naspur Mandal, including the petitioners herein, for the purpose of allotting house site of 80 square yards each. However, the counter affidavit is silent as to whether any proposals have been submitted pursuant to the said Memo or not.

Having regard to the above, it is directed that in case, the Collector, Mancherial District, has not complied with the direction issued vide Memo dated 12.11.2020, he/she shall submit the necessary proposals as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case, the proposals are submitted by the Collector, Mancherial District, the Government is directed to pass necessary orders granting approval for allotting house site pattas to the affected families, including the petitioners herein, who are eligible, living in Singapur and Thallapally Villages, Naspur Mandal.

Having regard to the fact that the project involved is a time bound project, and in case, the lands are not handed over to the concerned Contractor, the project cost will escalate, which would ultimately result in huge loss to the public exchequer, the petitioners are granted two weeks time to vacate the subject premises. However, it is made clear that in case the petitioners do not vacate the subject premises within two weeks, as stipulated above, the respondent authorities are free to take necessary action for evicting the petitioners.

Subject to the above directions, Writ Petitions Nos. 18201, 18461, 22024, 24188, 24749, 25482, 26933 and 26938 of 2021 are disposed of.

Insofar as W.P. No.24151 of 2021 is concerned, as seen from the documents filed along with the counter filed in W.P. No.18201 of 2021, the officials have acquired the subject land as per the procedure contemplated under the National Highways Act, 1956. The petitioners have not filed any document to substantiate their claim that their properties are in the vicinity of the land that was acquired nor any sketch map is filed by the petitioner showing as to where exactly their lands are situated and how far their lands are situated from the place where the works are being undertaken by the authorities. Except filing a copy of the representation and two photos showing the on-going construction of road works, no other documents are filed. Admittedly, the acquisition is for widening of the road and the on-going works shall be construed for the very same purpose. Even if there is any blockage, it is only a temporary one and once the works are completed, the roads will be re-opened for use of the public and the grievance of the petitioner will be redressed automatically. Therefore, there cannot be any direction for stopping the ongoing works. Once, it is held that the official respondents have followed the procedure as contemplated under the Act, no impediments can be created for stopping the works and defeating the very purpose of the acquisition. Therefore, the writ petition fails and accordingly, W.P. No.24151 of 2021 is dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions pending in these writ petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.