Nafe Singh and 5 Others v. Union of India and 3 Others

Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37312 of 2023 Petitioner :- Nafe Singh And 5 Others Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nanda Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal,Sanjay Dwivedi Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

¶1Heard Sri Nand Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent no.1, Sri Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.4.

¶2The petitioners, whose land was acquired by NHAI have filed the instant petition praying for a mandamus commanding the respondents to pass rehabilitation and re-settlement award and extend its monetary benefits to the petitioners as per Sections 31, 38 and 25 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the claim of the petitioners is similar to the one raised in Writ C No.2782 of 2023 (Ashok Kumar and 8 others vs. National Highway Authority of India and 3 others), which was disposed of by this Court, by order dated 24.2.2023 in terms of the order passed in Writ C No.21601 of 2022 (Ranvir Singh and 35 others vs. National Highway Authority of India and Competent Authority For Land Acquisition and Others). The operative part of the order passed in Writ C No.2782 of 2023 (Ashok Kumar and 8 others vs. National Highway Authority of India and 3 others), dated

24.2.2023 is as follows :- "9. Lastly the writ petitions have been disposed of with the following directions:- "For the above, without entering into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, it is directed that the competent authority under the National Highways Act, 1956 shall prepare a proposal for the rehabilitation and resettlement award for affected families, within the meaning of Section 3(c) of the Act, 2013, in terms of the entitlements provided in the Second Schedule, with the assistance of the officers of the NHAI and submit the same before the Collector for making award in accordance with the provisions of Section 31 of the RECTLARR Act, 2013. For preparation of the said proposal, the competent authority shall make necessary enquiry as per the provisions of the Sections 34, 35 and 36 of the RECTLARR Act, 2013 as contained in Chapter V of the Act, 2013, i.e before preparation of the rehabilitation and resettlement award, in relation to the acquisition in question. It goes without saying that the representatives of the National Highways Authority and the affected tenure holders are entitled to participate in the proceedings for preparation of the award. The claim of the petitioners herein for the entitlements under the Second Schedule at serial no. (1) for provision of housing unit in case of displacement; serial no. (4) choice of annuity and employment and serial no. (10), one time resettlement allowance, shall be specifically considered by the competent authority in making such an award. The entire exercise shall be completed, as expeditious as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. We may make it clear that, at this stage, no direction has been given for providing benefits of Third Schedule as no such demand has been raised by the petitioners herein. In any case, while making such an award, independent consideration shall be given to the elements of rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements for the affected families provided in the Second Schedule, without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove."

¶10The petitioners herein are similarly situated and, therefore, are entitled for the same relief.

¶11The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. "

¶4It is submitted that the instant petition be also disposed in same terms.

¶5Sri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent no.1, Sri Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.4. do not dispute that the claim of the petitioners is identical and they have no objection in case, the instant petition is also disposed of in same terms.

¶6Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of in terms of the order quoted above. (Donadi Ramesh, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 30.10.2023 Noman High Court of Judicature at Allahabad