Dismissed

Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University v. the State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Nov 2021WP/3479/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging an acquisition award and a notice to demolish a college compound wall for highway widening. The court held the procedural framework was followed, AWR**IT*** alternative remedy under the Arbitration Act was not exhausted, and sought a new wall was legal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed, interim order vacated, and the petitioners granted liberty to file an arbitration application under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.

Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶5

Between:

¶6

WRIT PETITI o N NO: 3479 OF 2021

¶7

Jawaharlal Nehru Technologicjrl University, Ashok Nagar, KpHB Colony, Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500085, Tetangana Siate, nep by iti"Rejgistiar-

¶8

^ Mandal,

¶9

Jntuh Collegs of Engineering ^Suttahpur, Sultanplr Viltage," puikat Sangareddy District, Telangana State - 502273. nef Uy its pn'ncipal.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Represented by its principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Land Acq-uisition, Secretariat B uildingj, Hyderabaci, Telangana State

¶13

[9.v.eJrUe^{Divisional Officer/ Competant Authority fbrL-and Acquisition,"ru.n.} t Ot , NHAI, Sangareddy District, Telangana State.

¶14

District Collector, Sangareddy District, Telanqana State.

¶15

NationalHighway Authority of tndia, Project lhptementation Unit, Vidhya Nagar Colony, Poth ireddypally, Sangareddy, Ti.'lanqaha State -502295. Reor'esentjd bv its Deputy Genetal Manager (Technical) and?roject Director.

¶16

,..RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 ol lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to grant a writ, order or Direction, more particularly in the nature of writ of tt4andamus, by declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in passing the unilateral Award No.B/NH-161/2613/18-3 dated 05.01.2019 in respect of the compound wall of the Petitioner No.2 property as well as the Notice issued by the Respondent No.4 dated 24.12.2020 to demolish the compound wall of^petitioner No.2 college and Notice dated 02.01.2020 in arbitrarily computing insufficient compensation as violative of Principles of Natural Justice, illegal, arbitrary, nonest in the eye of law being violative of Article 300 A, 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and not in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair compensation and rransparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, by setting aside the same and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to pass an Award in favour of the Petitioners in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with all other statutory benefits such as total market value + factor + value of the structure (Compound Wall) + solatium + interest in respect of the proposed acquisition of the land of the Petitioner No.2 including compound wall or in the alternate direct the Respondent No.2 to 4 herein to construct the compound wall on par with the existing compound wall in the premises of the Petitioner No.2 college before demolition of the existing compound wall.

¶18

(Prayer is amended as per Court Order, dated 08.11.2021 in l.A.No.6 ol 2021.\

¶19

il2ll

¶20

lA NO: 1^OF2021

¶21

PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatintheCircumstancesstatedinthe affidavit^{fired in supporl of the petition,the High court maybe pleased to directthe} Respondents^{not to demolishthe existing compound wall in the premisesof Petitioner} No.2 until^{by either first paying adequate compensationto enablethe Petitionersto} constructtheCompoundwalloralternativelytoconstructthecompoundwallonpar with the^{existing compound wall in the premises of the PetitionerNo 2 college'} pending disposal^{of the above writ petition'}

¶22

lA NO: 2^{OF 2021}

¶23

PetitionundersectionlslCPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesStatedinthe affidavit fired^{in support of the petition, the High court may be pleasedto extend the} lnterim orders^{dated19/0212021 made in W'P'No'3479ol 2O21 pending disposalof} the above^{WritPetition.}

¶24

lA NO: 3^{OF 2021}

¶25

PetitionunderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesStatedinthe affidavit filed^{in support of the petition'the High Court may be pleasedto extend the} lnterimordersdatedlgl02l2O2,lmadeinW.P'No.3479o,f2021whichwasextended on 05.03.2021,^{pendingdisposal of the above WritPetition'}

¶26

lA NO: 4 OF²⁰²¹

¶27

Between:

¶28

NationalHighwayAuthorityoflndia,Projectlmpleme-ntationUnit,VidhyaNagarColony, Pothireddvoallv, sanqareooi,^{iLrligu"iquie'-sozzgs'Representedby its Deputy} Genetal ltiana!er^{(Technical) and Prolect urreclor'}

¶29

...Petitioner/ResPondent^No.4

¶30

AND

¶31

Colony,

¶32

1 Jawaharlal^{Nehru TechnologicalUniverslty' Ashok Naggr'KPHB} ,

¶33

ffi,ffiffiily^{nva"iiuao-soob8d,Tetang"n'Siate, Rep bv its Regis]rar'} Mandal,

¶34

2 iXrri''6,jri"si,--oi^{engineerindsrlt,"np",sultanpurVillage' Pulkal} HriiirrEiivUistiictJ6rangini^{state- sozzttRepbv its Principal'}

¶35

...Respondents/Petitioners

¶36

3 The State of^{Telangana, Representedby its Principal Secretarv' Revenue} " D;;"",fi;;i ir^o l.qi,iJiiiJ,i, 5iii"t"i',it euiioingj, Hyoeraoad, relangana^s_tate 4 H;G;l;iji;i.il;l^{ok6;ic"mpetaiii4utnorityf6r L'and Acquisition' N.H.161'} NHAI. Sanoareddv District,^{Telangana State'}

¶37

s rjidiii"idotiector, Sansareddv^{District,Telangana State'}

¶38

.Respondents/ResPondents

¶39

Petition under section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High courtmay be pleased to vacate the} interim order daled^{191o2t2021 in l.A.No.1 0f 2021 in w.P.No.3479 0t 2021.}

i {I

il3il

lA NO: 5 OF 202'l

Between:

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary,^Revenue

¶46

Department, Land Acquisition, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad,^{Telangana qtate}

¶47

2 Revenue Divisional Officer/ Competant Authority for Land^{Acquisition,N.H.161,} NHAI, Sangareddy District, Telangana State.

¶48

3 District Collector, Sangareddy District,^{TelanganaState.}

¶49

...Petitioners/Respondent Nos.1 to 3 in W.P.

¶50

AND

¶51

1 Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University,^{Ashok Nagar, KPHB} Colony, Kukatpally, Hyd erabad-500085, Telangana State,^{Repby its Registrar.}

¶52

2 Jntuh Cdlleg-e of Engineering Sultanpur,^{Sultanpur Village,Pulkal} Mand a l, Sangareddybistrict, Telangana State^- 502273.^{Repby its Principal.}

¶53

...ResPondents/Writ Petitioners

¶54

3 National Highway Authority of^{lndia, Project lmplementationUnit, Vidhya Nagar} Colonv, Poihireddypally, Sangareddy,^{TelanganaState-502295. Represented by} its Debuty Genetal Manager^{(Technical) and Project Director.}

¶55

(Respondent No.3 is not necessary^party to^{this Petition.)}

¶56

..,RespondenURespondent No.4^{in W.P.}

¶57

Petition under section 151 CPC^{prayingthatin the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the} lnterim order^granted on 19.02.2021^{in w.P.No.3479of 2020and dismissthe writ} Petition as devoid of merits,

¶58

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRIV. RAMCHANDER GOUD,SC FORJNTU}

¶59

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.1to 3: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION}

¶60

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.4: SRI LAXMINARAYANAALISHETTY} SC FOR NHAI

¶61

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶62

HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICEK. LAKSHMAN}

¶63

WRIT PETITION^{No,3 479 0F 2021}

¶64

ORDER:

¶65

Heard Mr. V.^{Ramchander Goud, learned Standing Counselfor the} petitioners, Mr.^{LaxminarayanaAlishetty, leamed Standing Counsel for} respondent^{No.4,and leamed Government Pleader for Land Acquisition'}

¶66

This Writ^{Petitionis filed to declarethe action of respondent} No.4 in issuing^{notice dated 24.12'2020to demolish the compound wall} of petitioner^{No.2College and notice dated 02'01'2020 as arbitrary'} illegal, and for^{a consequential direction to the respondentsto passan} Award in favour^{of the petitioners in terms of the Right to Fair} Compensation^{and Transparencyin Land Acquisition' Rehabilitation and} ResettlementAct,2013(forshort'Act,2013')withallotherstatutory benehts, such^{as total marketvalue, factor, value of the structure} (compound wall) and solatium^{and interest in respect of the proposed} acquisition of^{the land of petitioner No'2 including compoundwall'}

¶67

After filing^{the counter by respondent No'4' the petitioners} herein filed LA.^{No.6 of 2021 seekingto amend the prayer by adding} paragraph Nos.14 to^{16 in the writ affidavit' The prayerwhich soughtto} be amended is^{as follows:}

¶68

",^{. .} ..^{pleased to grant a Writ,Order or Direction,} more particularly^{in the natureof Writ of Mandamtts,} by' declaring the^{action of the RespondentNo'2in} passing the unilateral Arvard^{No'BA'{H-| 6 | I 2613 I I 8-3} dated 05.0^I ,20^I 9^{in respect of the CompoundWall of} the Petitioner No.2^{property as well as the Notice} issued by the Respondent^{No.4 dated24-122020to}

¶69

_.----'n _

¶70

)

¶71

KL,J W.P.No.34Z9 of 2021

¶72

demolish the comporurd wall of petitioner No.2 College and Notice d,ated, 02.01.2020 in arbitrarily computing insufficient compensation as violative of Principles of Natural Justice, illegal, arbitrary, nonest in the eye of law being violative of Article 300.4, l4 and 2l of the Constitution of India and not in accordance with the provisions ol the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 201 3, by setting aside the same and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to pass an Award in favour of the Petitioners in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with all other statutory benefits such as total market value + factor * value of the structue (Compound Wall) + solatium * interest in respect of the proposed acquisition of the land of the Petitioner No.2 including compound wall or in the altemative direct the Respondent No.2 to 4 herein to construct the compound wall on par with the existing compound wall in the premises ol the petitioner No.2 college before demolition of the existing compound wall and pass such. . ..,'

¶73

4. CON',r ENTIONS OFTHEP ETITIONERS:

¶74

i) Petitioner No. I is a University while petitioner No.2 is irs College.

¶75

ii) Respondent No.2 had issued proceedings dated 04.04.201g and passed an Award behind the back ofthe petitioners in respect ofthe land admeasuring 59,780 square meters in Sultanpur Village for the purpose of National Highway, and calculated the compensation @ Rs.3,12,500/_ per acre or P.s.77.21 ps. per square meters, wherein the land admeasuring

¶76

¶77

KL,J ll.P.No.^j479 of202l

¶78

¶79

485 square meters of^{petitionerNo.2 College was also mentioned, in} which a compensation of^{Rs.1,16,083/- was sanctioned to the petitioners'}

¶80

iii) Respondent No.2 had^passed a^{secondawarddated} 1 1 .06,201 8, wherein they have^{followed similar procedureas followedin} the first award dated 04.04.2018^{and identified the landadmeasuring} 1336 square meters in Sy.No.40,^{and 1821 squaremetersin Sy.No.41} belonged to the^petitioners and^{prescribed acompensationof} Rs.3,i5,3921 for the land admeasuring^{1336squaremeters in Sy.No.40} and Rs.4,29,888i- for the land^{admeasuring 1821 square meters in} Sy.No.41.

¶81

iv) Respondent No.2 vide award dated^{11.06.2018had acquired} the land admeasuring 29,337 square meters in^{SarafpallyVillageand} handed over its possession to the National Highway^Authority of^India and calcuiated the compensation @ Rs.12,10,000/-^{per acreor Rs.298.98} paise per square meter, wherein the land admeasuring 202 square meters in Sy.No.361 and 2630 square meters in Sy.No.362 of^{petitionerNo.2} College was acquired, for which a compensation of Rs.1,84,657l-^{for the} land admeasuring202 square meters in Sy.No.36l and Rs,24,04,1921- for 2630 square meters in Sy.No.362 was sanctioned. Even the Award^was intimated to the petitioners on 21.03.2019. No notice or any Notification / Proposal were served on the petitioners.

¶82

v) The land admeasuring 6474 square meters, a compound wall with approximate dimensions of 340 meters in length, 0.30 meters width

¶83

¶84

KL,J It.P.No.3479 of2021

¶85

and 3.66 meters height is falling under the proposed road widening / 4 _ Lane of National Highway No.16l. As such, petitioner No.2 vide letter dated 10.12.2020 intimated petitioner No. 1 that to construct a new compound wall, it would cost Rs.g0,00,000/_, the details of which are mentioned in detail, and informed the same to respondent No.4.

¶86

vi) Respondent No.4 had issued notice dated 24.12.2020 ro petitioner No.2 asking it to demolish the said compound wall. Respondent No.2 further issued a notice dated oz.or.2o2o infonning pe3titioner No.2 that the compensation of Rs.4,19,91ll_ is being sanctioned. Petitioner No.2 informed petitioner No.l vide letter dated 07.01.2021 that respondent No.2 has awarded a compensation of Rs'4, I 9,9 1 i /- for the compound war. petitioner No. t had arso addressed a letter to respondent No.3 vide letter dated lr.or.2o2r to enhance the compensation for the proposed construction of the compound wall as the said amount of Rs.4,19,911/- is not sufficient as per the estimation of the actual cost of construction. The said representation was not considered. Therefore, the petitioners herein have filed the present writ petition.

¶87

Respondent No.4 has filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ affidavit. Respon<lent Nos.1 to 3 adopted the contents of the counter affidavit fi1ed by respondent No.4.

¶88

6. CONTENTI ONS OF RE SPONDENT No.4:

¶89

i) National Highways Authority of India has been constituted under the National Highways Authority of lndia Act, iggg with an

¶90

¶91

KL,J tY. P.No.3479 of202l

¶92

objective to develop, maintain and manage the National Flighways in the Country.

¶93

iD The procedure for acquisition of the land and the matters connected thereto are elaborately spelt out in the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short 'Act, 1956').

¶94

iii) Pursuant to the policy of Central Government, four laning projects of the National Highway No. 1 61 in Sangareddy' District in the State of- Telangana was entrusted to the National Highways Authority of India for irnplementation and maintenance, thereafter in line with the objectives of the National Highways Act. Respondent No.4 has taken up the four-laning maintenance, management and operation of the National Highway No.161 connecting Sangareddy - Nanded Akola Section from 0.000 to K.M. 39"980 for public purpose.

¶95

iv) The Revenue Divisional Officer - cum - Competent Authority for Land Acquisition, Sangareddy District has been appointed for undertaking acquisition of lands in terms of Section - 3,A of Act, 1956. Notification under Section - 34. was issued on 01.06.2017. wherein the petitioners' land at Sulthanpur Village to an extent of 485.86 square meters in Survey No.362 and the land situated in Sarafpally Village in Sy.No.362 to an extent of 2713.99 square meters has been notified. The Notification was published in two Daily News papers vL., The Hindu (English) and Namaste Telangana (Telugu) on 16.06.2017.

'-:1*-,

---..--

Kr.,.l tr. P. No,317 9 of 2021

¶100

v) The second notification under Section - 34 was issued on 19.12.2017 for acquisition of additional land situated at sulthanpur village to an extent of 1336 square meters in Sy.No.40 and an extent of 1821 square meters in Sy.No.41, and the land to an extent of 202 square meters in Survey No.361 of Sarafpally village, and the said notification was published in two Newspapers viz,, The Hindu (English) and Sakshi (Telugu) on 03.0 I .201 8.

¶101

vi) In all the said notifications, objections were called from the persons interested in the said lands including the petitioners herein within 21 days fi'om the date of publicatior.r of notification. 30 objection petitions were received under Section - 3C and the same were disposed of by hearing on 17.07.2017. The petitioners herein have not filed any objection petition.

¶102

vii) The first notification under Section - 3D of the Act, 1956 was issued on 20.11.2017 with regard to the Sulthanpur Village. On publication of Notification under Section - 3D, the lands shall vest absolutely in the Central Govemment free from all encumbrances.

¶103

viii) Notification under Section - 3G of the Act. 1956 was published in the Hans India (English) and Andhra Prabha (Telugu) Daily Newspapers dated 27.12.201 7 intimating the land losers to be present on 05.01.2018 at Revenue Divisional Office, Sangareddy, along with documents.

¶104

¶105

¶106

KL,J lY.P.No.3479 of2021

¶107

¶108

i*) The second notification under^{Section- 3D was issued on} 09.02.2018 with regard to the^{acquisitionof additionallands in} Sulthanpur Village and Sarafoally Village.

¶109

x) The Notification under Section -^3G of^{the Act, 1956 was} published in The Hans India (English) and Andhra Prabha^{(Telugu)Daily} Newspapers on22.02.2018, with a similar^request.

¶110

xi) The possession of the lands was taken over by^{the Department} after serving notice under Section - 3E ofthe Act, 1956.^{Various private} lands that were affected under 4-laning of the National^Highwaywere acquired in accordance with the provisions of the Act, 1956 by^following the procedure contained in Section - 3A to 3G.

¶111

xii) After conducting due enquiry, respondent No.2 by duly following the procedure laid down in the Acq 1956 and applicable provisions of the Act, 2013, passed an Award dated 04.01.2018 fixing compensation at Rs.1,16,083/- which was paid to^petitioner No.2 vide cheque No.534, dated 26.03.2020. Like-wise, respondent No.2 has passed Award dated 11.06.2018 fixing the compensation at Rs.3,15,392llor Sy.No.40 ano Rs.4,59,888/- for Sy.No.41 ol Sulthanpur Village and the same was paicl to petitioner No.2 vide Cheque No.535, dated 26.03.2020. Respondent No.2 had also passed an Award dated 1i.06.2018 in respect of Sy.Nos.361 and362 of Sarafpally Village fixing the compensation at Rs.1,84,6571- andRs.24,04,1921- for Sy.No.4i and the same was paid to petitioner No.2 vide Cheque No.538.

¶112

¶113

KI,J ll/. P.No.3179 of 2021

¶114

xiii) Respondent No.2 arso passecl an Award dated 05.0r.20r9 in respect of structure / compound walr of petitioners in Surthanpur vilrage and awarded compensation of Rs.4,66,56g/- as per the valuation report submitted by the Executive Engineer, R&8, Sangareddy. That apart, respondent No.2 had also awarded multiplication factor, 100%o solatium and 120/o additional market varue as per the Act, 2013 and arso gave 25o/o weightage in lieu of revision of market value.

¶115

xiv) Respondent No.2 has also relied upon a decision in Narmali Anjaiah v. State of Telanganar.

¶116

xv) With the aloresaid subnrissions, respondent No.2 sought to dismiss the writ petition.

¶117

7. ANALYSIS ANT) FINDING OF THE COURT:

¶118

i) In view of the above rival contentions, according to the petitioners, r'espondent No.2 has passed the Award dated 05.01.2019 without serving any notice and without giving opportunity to the petitioners in respect of the compound wall of the petitioner No.2. Respondent No.4 has issued notice dated 24.12.2020 requesting the petitioners to dernolish the compound wall of petitioner No.2 college and notice dated 02.0 1.2020 arbitrarily computing insuffi cient compensation which is illegal and, therefore, they sought a direction to respondent No.2 to pass an Award in their favour, or alternative direction to construct the compound wali on par u,ith the existing compound wall in the prernises

¶119

'.^{zor q (o) Ar-T2-57(TS)}

¶120

¶121

¶122

KL,J W.P.No.^j479 of2021

¶123

of petitioner No.2. Whereas, according to respondent^{No.4, they have} followed the entire procedure laid down under the Act, 1956 and that there was no violation of principles of natural^justice as alleged by the petltloners.

¶124

ii) In view of the above submissions, it is apt to ret'er to Section^- 3C of the Act, 1956, which is as under:

¶125

"3G. Determination of amount payable as compensation.- (1) Where any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid an amount which shall be determined by an order ofthe competent authority.

¶126

(2) Where the right of user or any right in the nature of an easement on, any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid an amount to the owner and any other person whose right of enjoyment in that land has been affected in ary manner whatsoever by reason of such acquisition an amount calculated at ten per cent. of the amount determined under subsection (l), for that land.

¶127

(3) Before proceeding to determine the amount under sub-section ( I ) or sub-section (2), the competent authority shall give a public notice published in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons interested in the land to be acquired.

¶128

(4) Such nolice shall state the particulars ofl the land and shall require all persons interested in such land to appear in person or bv an agent or by a legal practitioner referred to in sub-section (2) of section 3C, betbre the conrpetent authority, at a time and place and to state the nature of their respective interest in such land.

¶129

(5) lf the amount determined by the competent authority under subsection ( 1) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Govemment.

¶130

(6) Subject to the provisions of this Acg the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Ast, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to every arbitration under this Act.

¶131

(7) The competent authority or the arbitrator while determining the amount under sub-section (l) or sub-section (5), as the case may be, shall take into consideration-

-.-___-.!'h,

.. _

K L,J ll. P. No.3179 a| 202 t

¶136

(a) the malket value of thc land on tho date of publication ol.the

¶137

notiflcation under section JAI

¶138

(h) the damage. if any. sustaincd by the person interested at the tjmc of taking possession of the land, by reason of the severing of such Iand from other landl

¶139

(c) the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at the time of taking possession of the Iand, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other immovable property in any manner, or his earnings;

¶140

(d) if, in consequences of the acquisition of the land, the person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business, the reasonable expenses, ifany, incidental to such change.,,

¶141

iii) As per Section - 3G (3) ofthe Act, 1956, before proceeding to

¶142

determine the amount under Sub-Section ( 1 ) or Sub_Section (2), the competent Authority shall give a public notice published in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons interested in the land to be acquired. As per Section - 3G (4), such notice sharr state the particulars of the rand and shall require all persons interested in such land to appear in person or by an agent or by a legal practitioner refered to in Sub_Section (2) of Section 3C, before the competent authority, at a time and place and to state the nature of their respective interest in such land. Therefore as per the said Section, respondent No.2 i.e., Revenue Divisional Officer - cum - Competent Authority for Land Acquisition, Sangareddy District, appointed under Section - 3 (a) of the Act, 1956, had issued norices under Section - 3G (iii) of the Act in two Daily Newspapers viz.,the Hans India (English) and Andhra Prabha (Telugu) on 22.02.2018. Thus, responclent

¶143

¶144

KL,J W.P.No.3479 of 2021

¶145

¶146

No.2 has published one notice in local daily newspaper i.e., the Hans India (English) and the other one in vernacular language i.e., Andhra Prabha (Telugu). As per the said provision, there is no obligation on the part ol respondent No.2 to serve notice on the petitioners separately. What all the said provision mandates is to publish a notice in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons interested in the land to be acquired. In the case on hand, respondent No.2 has complied with the said mandatory provision. In view of the same, the contention of the petitioners that the award dated 05.01.2019 was passed by respondent No.2 without serving any notice and without giving any opportunity to the petitioners is unsustainable. Petitioner No. lbeing a University and petitioner No.2 being College cannot plead ignorance.

¶147

iv) It is also relevant to note that the petitioners herein have not submitted any objections to the Notifications, dated 01.06.2017, 19.12.2017 and 03.01.2018 issued under Secrion - 3A of the Act, 1956" Section - 3C of the Act mandates submission of objections by any interested person in the land within twenty-one days from the date of publication of the notification. Thereafter, the Competent Authority has to pass declaration under Section - 3D. Section- 3E deals with power to take possession. Section - 3F deals with right to enter into the land where land was vested in the Central Government. Thus, the petitioners have not submitted any objections.

¶148

¶149

KL,J W.P.No.3479 of 2021

¶150

v) It is also relevant to nore that in the writ affidavit itself, the petitioners herein have specifically mentioned that the Awards were intimated on 21 .03.2019. In view of the same, the petitioners herein cannot contend that respondent No.2 has not serued any notice and not given any opporrunity to thern belore passing awards.

¶151

vi) The other grievance of the petitioners is that, respondent No.2 has not computed the compensation by following the principle laid down under the Act, 2013 with all other statutory benefits such as total market value * factor * value of the structure (compound wall) + solatium + interest in respect of the proposed acquisition of the land of petitioner No.2 including compound wall. The petitioners have also sought an alternative direction to respondent Nos.2 to 4 to construct the compound wall on par with the existing cornpound wall in the premises of petitioner No.2 College before demolition olthe existing compound wall,

¶152

vii) It is the specific contention of respondent No.4 that after conducting enquiry and after following due procedure laid down under law, respondent No.2 has passed the above said awards including the award dated 05.01.2019 in respect of the structure /compound wall of the petitioner in Sulthanpur Village and awarded an amount of Rs.4,66,568/towards compensation. Respondent No.2 has awarded the said compensation for structures as per the valuation report submitted by the Executive Engineer, R&B, Sangareddy. Respondent No.2 has also awarded rnultiplication factor,, 100% solatium and, 12oh additional market value as per the Act, 2013 and also gave 25o/o weightage in lieu of

¶153

¶154

KL,J It.P, Nct.^{j479 of 2021}

¶155

revision of^{market value.The conclusion of respondent No'2 on the} fixationofthemarketvalueofthelandsandStructureaff.ectedisasper law and based^{on cogent reasons. The award passed by respondent No'2} is a well-reasoned^{Award and was passed afterconsidering all the aspects} and evidence^{on record.The valuation of permanent structures /} compound wall^{are valued by the Executive Engineer (R&B), N'H} Division and^{the Executive Engineer(RWS) has furnishedvaluation of} bore-wells and^{open wells in the lands coming underacquisition'} RespondentNo'2hadfixedthecompensationforthestructure.existingon the lands acquired^{by taking into consideration of valuation of such} structures as^{per the valuation reports fumishedby the Executive} Engineer, R&B^{Department and the compensationawarded by} respondent No.2^{is just, proper and reasonableThe valuationof} pennanent struclures^{was doneby the concemedexpetls in the said fields} by duly following^{the procedure' The compensationfor the structure} beingaffectedundertheroadwideningprojectisdeterminedtakinginto consideration^{of all the parameters, such as age of the structure' material} used,^{quality of the constructionetc'' and depreciation accordingto the} age of the building^{will also be applied, and as such'valuationof the} structures is technical^{in nature and is being done by the experts in the} field. The compensation^{is for the structuresaffected under acquisition} and not for reconstruction^{of new stlucture i.e., new compoundwall in} the present case,^{cannot be paidand thereis no such requirementor any} stipulatico uncler^law.

¶156

¶157

KL,J lI/,P.No,3479 of 2021

¶158

viii) A perusal of the impugned award dated 05.01.2019 would reveal that respondent No.2 has specifically mentioned the fixation of value of the open wells, bore wells in the tabular form. He has also consideled the valuation report submitted by the Executive Engineer, R&B Division, Sangareddy, dated 24.12.2018 and the Executive Engineer, RWS Division, Sangareddy, dated 22.12.2018. The compensation details of the Village are also specifically mentioned. The award statement sheet annexed to the award dated 05.01.2019 would reveal the said fact.

¶159

ix) It is also apt to refer herein that as per Section - 3G (2) of the Act, 1956, where any land is acquired under this Act, there sha1l be paid an amount which shall be determined by an order of the competent authority, and as per Section - 3G (3), where the right ofuser or any right in the nature ofan easement on, any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid an amount to the owner and any other person whose right of enjoyment in that land has been affected in any manner whatsoever by reason of such acquisition an amount calculated at ten per cent. of the amount determined under sub-section⁽ 1), for that land.

¶160

x) In view of the above, according to respondent No.4, he had calculated and fixed the compensation by considering the valuation of permanent structures which are valued by the Executive Engineer, R&B Division and the Executive Engineer, RWS Division.^{Thus,this Court is}

¶161

¶162

KL,J tl P. No.3479 of 2021

¶163

of the opinion that there is no violation of the procedure laid down under the Act, 1956 by respondent No.2

¶164

xi) However, it is relevant to note that as per Section - 3G (5) of the Act, if the amount determined by the competent authority under subsection (l) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either ofthe parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Govemment. Section - 3G (6) envisages that subject to the provisions of this Act, rhe provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to every arbitration under the Act, 1956. As per Section - 3G (7), the competent authority or the arbitrator while determining the amount under sub-section (l) or sub-section (5), as the case may be, shall take certain facts into consideration while passing an award. According to respondent No.4, respondent No.3 - District Collector is the competent / proper authority appointed under Section - 3G (5) ofthe Act, and ifthe petitioners are having any grievance with regard to the compensation, they have to avail such altemative remedy by way of initiation of proceedings under the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996. Instead of initiation of such alternative proceedings, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.

¶165

xii) As stated above, Section - 3G (5) of the Act contemplates the procedure for determination of award. Though the petitioners herein have contended that respondent No.2 has not considered several aspects while

¶166

¶167

¶168

KL,J W.P.No.3479 of 2021

¶169

passing the award 05.01.2019,^{but without availing the said altemative} remedy^{under Section- 3G (5), filed the presentwrit petition'}

¶170

xiii) In Nerajala^{Nageswara Rao v' Union of India2' this Court} had an occasion^{to deal with the entire procedurelaid down under Act'} 1956 and^{referringto various provisionsheld that there is nothing} contemplated^{of Inentioning any namesof land owners or persons being} aflected in^{the Section - 3 (1) (A) notification or Section- 3 (l) (D)} declaration or in^{the paper publicationsbut for by publicnoticefrom} notifications^{and paper publications,no personalnoticesare} contemplated.^{If to the Section - 3 (1) (A) GazetteNotificationand paper} publications,^{no objections received are within 2l days there-from to} enquire under^{Section - 3 (1) (C), the declaration under Section - 3 (1)} (D) shall follow^{by Gazette Notification and paper publicationsand} consequent^{to it the landsvest statutorilywith the Central Govemmentby} diversity of^{all rights of owners or other persons having interest on the} Iands. But^{for to claim just compensation no objection to the} Govemment^{or the other authorizedto enter and 1ay roads etc' by taking} possession on^{paylllent or deposit ol cotrpensation and none carl} obstruct.ltwaslurtherheldthatonceitistheintention'itisinvitingthe public by^{mentioning the description of the land onlyand not even who} are the^{persons interested or nalnes of the persons with referenceto} revenue^{record or otherwise' It is only the substanceof said notification} to be^{published in the two local newspapers' one of whichmust be in the}

¶171

'?.^{zotr 1:; er-os'ls}

¶172

^".4----

¶173

1'.l

¶174

KL'J lv.P.No.3479^of2021

¶175

vemacular language'^{It was further held that whateverthe objections} they can^{raise for the entitlementof fair compensation' they are entitled} to raise^{beforethe Collectorby frlingarbitration applicationas} contemplated^{by Section- 3 (G) (5) of the Act' 1956 and the Collector is} bound to consider^{the same'}

¶176

8.CoNCLUSI N

¶177

¶178

i) As discussed^{supra, the respondentauthority have followedthe} procedure laid^{downunderthe Act, 1956 for acquisitionof the land; and} the compensation^{was determinedby respondent No'2 and he has passed} the award^{dated 05.01.2019 by following the due procedure' If the} petitioners are^{not satisfied with the said compensation'theyhave to file} an application^{under Section- 3G (5) of*re Act before respondent No'3'} Instead of doing^{so, the petitioners herein have frled the present writ} petition. Thus, the^{petitioners hereinfailed to make out any case to} interfere with^{the award dated 05.01.2019passed by respondentNo2 in} respect of the^{structure / compound wall as soughtby the petitioners in} the present writ^{petition.Thereafterthe petitioners are not entitled for the} said relief.^{There is no procedurelaid downin any law including the} Act, i 95 6 to^{constructa compound wa[1 on par with the existing} compound^{wall in the premisesof petitionerNo'2 beforedemolitionof} the existing compound^{wall. The said relief sought by the petitioners is} untenable. As rightly^{contended by respondent No'4that the stoppageof} work would only^{result in escalationof project costsapart from depriving} the benefits ofexecution^{ofthe projects to the public at large' The said}

¶179

' rr I lla tiurll ! ||||rtr

¶180

¶181

¶182

KI, J W.P.No.3479 of 2021

¶183

¶184

principle was also held in Narmali Anjaiahr. Thus, the writ petition

¶185

fails and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶186

ii) The present writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to avail alternative remedy under Section - 3G (5) ofthe Act, i956.

¶187

iii) The interim order dated 19.02.2021 granted by this Court

¶188

stands vacated.

¶189

iv) In the circurnstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶190

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ

¶191

petition shall stand closed.

¶192

SD/.T.KRISHNA KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR i/rRUE COPY/' .^{iL _}