Allowed

G.Venkateshwarlu v. The Arbitrator/Additional Joint Collector

Telangana HC23 Jul 2012WP/9824/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court permitted the petitioner to submit an application to the District Collector for enhancement of compensation under Section 3G of the National Highways Act, directing the Collector to decide the claim expeditiously within one month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit an application to the District Collector for enhancement of compensation; Collector directed to decide within one month.

G.Venkateshwarlu Vs The Arbitrator/Additional Joint… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.9824 of 2012

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent in not considering the request of the petitioner to enhance the compensation for acquisition of his land in Sy.No.505 situated at Pillalamarri village of Suryapet Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶5

The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of a house constructed in land admeasuring 525 sq. yards in Sy.No.505 of Pillalamarri village of Suryapet Mandal, Nalgonda District. It is stated that as the said land was required for the purpose of road widening of the Highway to a four lane, it was notified under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’). The competent authority has fixed the compensation of Rs.4,57,619 for the land of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that as the competent authority has not properly valued his property and the compensation was not paid according to the market value, he made several representations to the arbitrator to enhance the compensation, but so far no action has been taken on the said representations.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under the provisions of the Act, the District Collector concerned is the arbitrator for adjudication of the claims with regard to determination of compensation, but subsequently the State Government has issued a notification entrusting powers to the Joint Collector also.

¶7

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondent has

¶8

produced a copy of proceedings in NHAI/LA/RR/2001/9, dated 16.09.2009, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of SubSection (5) of Section 3G of the Act, the Central Government appointed the District Collectors as Arbitrators for the purpose of exercising the powers and duties conferred on them under the said section.

¶9

A perusal of Section 3G of the Act clearly shows that the Central Government is the competent authority for appointing the Arbitrators to adjudicate the claims concerning determination of the amount under the provisions of the Act. As per Sub-Section (5) of Section 3 G of the Act, if the amount determined by the competent authority under subsection (1) or sub-section (2) of the said Section is not acceptable to either of the parties, the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government is empowered to determine the same on an application by either of the parties.

¶10

Since the Central Government is the appointing authority to appoint an Arbitrator for adjudication of the claims regarding determination of compensation and in view of the proceedings in NHAI/LA/RR/2001/9, dated 16.09.2009, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition permitting the petitioner to submit an application to the District Collector concerned seeking enhancement of compensation for acquisition of his property under the provisions of the Act, if the compensation awarded by the competent authority is not adequate and does not represent the market value, and thereupon, the District Collector shall entertain the same and decide the claim of the petitioner as contemplated under Sub-Section (5) of Section 3G of the Act, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the application of the petitioner.

¶11

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶12

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶13

___________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J

¶14

23.07.2012

¶15

Note: (1) Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Collector, Nalgonda. (2) Issue CC in one week. B/o v v

G.Venkateshwarlu v. The Arbitrator/Additional Joint Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Venkateshwarlu v. The Arbitrator/Additional Joint Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mulam Aravalu, Vs The District Collector

Doddi Achi Babu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Sri Subramanyam Auto Electrical works Vs The Government of A.P

K. Ramesh Babu, S/o. K. Paul Raj Vs The District Collector

Sri. Jugal Kishore, Vs The District Collector

Vummadi Anil Kumar Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh