Rajendra Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15827 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W. P. (C) No. 1307 of 2023

¶4

1.Rajendra Saw 2.Suraj Saw

¶5

Both sons of Late Thakur Saw, R/o Teli Tola, P.O. & PS Barhi, DistrictHazaribag. 3.Jugal Saw, S/o Late Kamal Saw. 4.Prakash Saw, S/o Ruplal Saw

¶6

5.Bigan Saw, S/o Ruplal Saw

¶7

6.Aruna Devi, W/o Ruplal Saw 7.Ganesh Saw, S/o Late Fulchand Saw 8.Karu Saw, S/o Late Fulchand Saw

¶8

9.Mahendra Saw, S/o Late Fulchand Saw 3 to 9 are residents of Village- Dhobitola, PO & PS Barhi, DistrictHazaribagh. 10. Bhola Saw, S/o Dhanu Saw, R/o Patna Road, Teli Tola, PO & PS Barhi, District- Hazaribagh. 11.Amrit Saw, S/o Late Khirodar Shaw, R/o Village- Mukhia Colony, Bhuli, B, Block Quarter No.B/201, PO & PS. Bhuli, District- Dhanbad. 12.Sahdeo Saw, S/o Late Ugar Saw, R/o Patna Road, PO & PS Barhi, District- Hazaribagh. 13.Dwarika Saw, S/o Late Nunu Saw, R/o Patna Road, PO & PS Barhi, District- Hazaribagh. 14.Dhaneshwar Prasad Keshri, S/o Late Shidi Saw 15.Lakhan Prasad Keshri, S/o Late Bandhan Keshri 16.Kashi Kumar Keshri, S/o Jobhi Saw, 17.Narayan Prasad Keshri, S/o Late Saryu Prasad Keshri 18.Indradeo Prasad Keshri, S/o Raghav Saw 14 to 18 are residents of Dhanbad Road, PO & PS Barhi, DistrictHazaribagh.

¶9

.... .. ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand. 2.Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, Ranchi. 3.Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag. 4.Additional Collector, Hazaribag.

¶10

5.District Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribag.

¶11

6.National Highway Authority of India, Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways, Government of India through its Project Implementation Unit, Kanhari Hill Road, P.S. Sadar, P.O. & District- Hazaribag. 7.Regional Officer, Regional Office, National Highway Authority of India, Ashok Nagar, Ranchi.

¶12

. .. ... ...Respondent(s)

¶13

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶14

......... For the Petitioner (s) : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, Advocate Mr. Ram Chander Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. A. Kumar, AC to GA.I For the NHAI : Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate

¶15

…... 13/ 16.06.2025 . Heard, learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15827 )

¶17

Petitioners are aggrieved by the Award of compensation for the land acquired for NH.31 (Barhi- Rajauli Section) under National Highway Authority Act, 1956 vide Notification No.543 (E) and for payment of adequate compensation in terms of provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶18

The facts of this case are not in dispute that the land measuring total area of 5.925 acres was acquired for laning/ widening of National Highway No.31, Barhi- Rajauli Under Section 3A of the National Highway Act, 1956.

¶19

Subsequent to the said acquisition, estimate for compensation was issued by the Government of India vide Notification dated 14.02.2017 amending the earlier Notification No.543 dated 14.02.2016 and the nature of land which was earlier shown as commercial was changed to Commercial /Residential/ Agricultural and accordingly award was prepared under Section 3(G) which was sent by the Land Acquisition Officer by Letter No.1770 dated 16.11.2017 to the Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, Hazaribag for approval of the Award.

¶20

The said estimate was challenged by the National Highway Authority Act in Arbitration Case No.02 of 2020 with regard to the nature of land which was declared as commercial land vide Notification dated 14.02.2017. The application filed by the NHAI was dismissed. However, the nature of land which was declared as commercial was changed into commercial, residential and agricultural and the award of compensation was reduced from Rs.1,060,958,293/to Rs.54,71,88,93.00/-.

¶21

The Award passed by the Additional Collector, Hazaribag is underchallenge in the instant Writ Petition.

¶22

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Award was passed without service of notice and without hearing the petitioner and, therefore, the instant prayer has been made to refer the same.

¶23

Learned counsel for the NHAI has submitted that the petitioners have a remedy and without exhausting the same, they have moved this Court for redressal of their grievances. Petitioners have a remedy to approach before the appropriate authority in view of provisions of Section 3-G (5) of the National Highway Authority Act, 1956.

¶24

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15827 )

¶25

Consequently, the instant Writ Petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach before the appropriate authority in view of provisions of Section 3-G(5) of the National Highway Authority Act, 1956. If the petitioners approach before the competent authority, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and appropriate order be passed within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

¶26

The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the aforementioned observations and directions. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

¶27

( Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. )

¶28

Sandeep/

Rajendra Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Kumar Sharma Vs Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum

Munni Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary/Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Dept.

Shyam Sundar Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Anil Kumar Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary

Sahadat Hussain Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kashi Nath Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary