S.Venu v. Union of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.04.2023 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.T.RAJA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.A.Nos.1179, 2298, 2299, 2348, 2371 and 2068 of 2021 and W.P.No.16520 of 2021 W.A.No.1179 of 2021: S.Venu .. Appellant Vs.

1.Union of India, rep. by Secretary, National Highways Department, New Delhi.

2.The Chairman, National Highways Authority of India, G-5 and 6 Sector, 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 015.

3.National Highways Authority of India, rep. by its Regional Officer, PIU Sri Tower 3rd Floor, DP.34 (SP) Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

4.National Highways Authority of India, rep. by its Project Director, Project Implementation Unit – Kanchipuram, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West – 600 045.

5.The District Collector, Collector Office, Vellore District.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LANH), Sathuvachari, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA), National Highways, Kancheepuram District.

.. Respondents W.A.No.2298 of 2021: D.Nanthakumar .. Appellant Vs.

1.Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi.

2.The Chairman, The National Highways Authority of India, G-5 and 6 Sector, 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 015.

3.The National Highways Authority of India, rep. by its Regional Officer, Sri Tower 3rd Floor, DP,34 (SP) Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

4.The Project Director (NH 4), National Highways Authority of India, PIU Sri Tower 3rd Floor, DP.34 (SP) Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

5.S.Venu

6.The District Collector, Collector Office, Vellore District.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA-NH), Collector office Complex, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA), National Highways, Kancheepuram. .. Respondents

W.A.No.2299 of 2021: D.Nanthakumar .. Appellant Vs.

1.The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Kancheepuram National Highways Authority of India, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West – 600 045, Chengalpattu District.

2.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.

3.The Principal Secretary to Government, Highways and Minor Ports Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.

4.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

5.The District Collector, Ranipet District, Ranipet.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA-NH), Collector office Complex, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.R.Ashokan

8.S.Venu

9.N.Kasi

10.C.K.Munisamy

11.N.Sankar

12.U.Gunasekaran

13.T.Kumarasamy

14.R.Gulasekaran

15.T.Vasudevan

16.Angu

17.P.Valliyammal

18.J.Kavitha

19.P.G.Kanniyappan

20.K.Nagappan

21.A.Ravi

22.K.Samu

23.G.Arul

24.M.Karunakaran

25.M.Rex Amulraj

26.V.Perumal

27.Rose

28.E.Selvakumar

29.Suguna Kumari

30.A.Murali

31.M.Sujatha

32.D.Nagaraj

33.P.Jaisankar

34.P.Anbazhagan

35.C.S.Balaji

36.K.Gunasekaran

37.R.Prakasam

38.V.Perumalsamy

39.K.Balakrishnan

40.Subramani

41.S.Kanimozhi

42.D.Perumal

43.P.G.Gopal

44.M.Rajakumari

45.P.Sakunthala

46.S.Raji C.S.Seshadhri

47.V.Manoharan

48.R.Jagadeesan

49.K.Kamalakannan

50.P.Gangabai

51.S.Santha

52.P.Chinnpaiyan

53.G.Pitchandi

54.Sekar

55.P.Velu

56.D.Sumathi

57.M.Masilamani

58.Abdul Kaleel

59.M.Pushpa

60.M.Baby

61.T.Backialakshmi .. Respondents W.A.No.2348 of 2021: P.G.Gopal .. Appellant Vs.

1.Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi.

2.The Chairman, The National Highways Authority of India, G-5 & 6 Sector, 10 Dwarka, New Delhi-110 015.

3.The National Highways Authority of India, rep. by its Regional Officer, PIU Sri Tower 3rd Floor, DP.34 (SP) Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

4.The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit-Kancheepuram National Highways Authority of India, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West – 600 045, Chengalpattu District.

5.S.Venu

6.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

7.The Competent Authority and The Special District Revenue Officer (LA-NH), Collector Office Complex, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

8.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA), National Highways, Kancheepuram. .. Respondents

W.A.No.2371 of 2021: P.G.Gopal .. Appellant Vs.

1.The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit-Kancheepuram National Highways Authority of India, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West – 600 045, Chengalpattu District.

2.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

3.The Principal Secretary to Government, Highways & Minor Ports Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

4.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

5.The District Collector, Ranipet District, Ranipet.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA-NH), Collector Office Complex, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.R.Ashokan

8.S.Venu

9.N.Kasi

10.D.Nanthakumar

11.C.K.Munisamy

12.N.Sankar

13.U.Gunasekaran

14.T.Kumarasamy

15.R.Gulasekaran

16.T.Vasudevan

17.Angu

18.P.Valliyammal

19.J.Kavitha

20.P.G.Kanniyappan

21.K.Nagappan

22.A.Ravi

23.K.Samu

24.G.Arul

25.M.Karunakaran

26.M.Rex Amulraj

27.V.Perumal

28.Rose

29.E.Selvakumar

30.Sugunakumari

31.A.Murali

32.M.Sujatha

33.D.Nagaraj

34.P.Jaisankar

35.P.Anbazhagan

36.C.S.Balaji

37.K.Gunasekaran

38.R.Prakasam

39.V.Perumalsamy

40.K.Balakrishnan

41.S.Kanimozhi

42.S.Kanimozhi

43.D.Perumal

44.M.Rajakumari

45.P.Sakunthala

46.S.Raji C.S.Seshadhri

47.V.Manoharan

48.R.Jagadeesan

49.K.Kamalakannan

50.P.Gangabai

51.S.Santha

52.P.Chinnpaiyan

53.G.Pitchandi

54.Sekar

55.P.Velu

56.D.Sumathi

57.M.Masilamani

58.Abdul Kaleel

59.M.Pushpa

60.M.Baby

61.T.Backialakshmi .. Respondents

W.A.No.2068 of 2021: M.Rex Amulraj .. Appellant Vs.

1.The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit-Kancheepuram National Highways Authority of India, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West – 600 045, Chengalpattu District.

2.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

3.The Principal Secretary to Government, Highways & Minor Ports Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

4.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

5.The District Collector, Ranipet District, Ranipet.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA-NH), Collector Office Complex, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.R.Ashokan

8.S.Venu

9.N.Kasi

10.D.Nanthakumar

11.C.K.Munisamy

12.N.Sankar

13.U.Gunasekaran

14.T.Kumarasamy

15.R.Gulasekaran

16.T.Vasudevan

17.Angu

18.P.Valliyammal

19.J.Kavitha

20.P.G.Kanniyappan

21.K.Nagappan

22.A.Ravi

23.K.Samu

24.G.Arul

25.M.Karunakaran

26.V.Perumal

27.Rose

28.E.Selvakumar

29.Sugunakumari

30.A.Murali

31.M.Sujatha

32.D.Nagaraj

33.P.Jaisankar

34.P.Anbazhagan

35.C.S.Balaji

36.K.Gunasekaran

37.R.Prakasam

38.V.Perumalsamy

39.K.Balakrishnan

40.S.Kanimozhi

41.S.Kanimozhi

42.D.Perumal

43.P.G.Gopal

44.M.Rajakumari

45.P.Sakunthala

46.S.Raji

47.V.Manoharan

48.R.Jagadeesan

49.K.Kamalakannan

50.P.Gangabai

51.S.Santha

52.P.Chinnpaiyan

53.G.Pitchandi

54.Sekar

55.P.Velu

56.D.Sumathi

57.M.Masilamani

58.Abdul Kaleel

59.M.Pushpa

60.M.Baby

61.T.Backialakshmi .. Respondents W.P.No.16520 of 2021: K.S.Suresh .. Petitioner Vs.

1.Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, National Highway Authority of India, New Delhi.

2.The Chairman, The National Highway Authority of India, G-5 and 6 Sector, 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 015.

3.The National Highway Authority of India, rep. by its Regional Officer, Sri Tower 3rd Floor, DP. 34 (SP), Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.

4.The Project Director (NH-46), National Highway Authority of India, Salem Main Road, Krishnagiri-635 001.

5.The District Collector, Collector Office, Vellore District.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LANH) Collector Office Complex, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA), National Highways, Kancheepuram. .. Respondents Prayer: W.A.Nos.1179, 2298 and 2348 of 2021 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 25.03.2021 passed in Review Application No.56 of 2020 in W.P.No.35530 of 2019. W.A.Nos.2299, 2371 and 2068 of 2021 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 25.03.2021 passed in W.P.No.9385 of 2020. W.P.No.16520 of 2021 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the compensation due and payable to petitioner in pursuant to the award passed by the 6th respondent vide his proceedings in Rc.G4/2/2016 dated 23.04.2019 in respect of wet lands situated in New Survey No.53/5 Chennasamudram Village, Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District having extent of 350 sq. mt. W.A.No.1179 of 2021: For the Appellant : Mr.N.L.Rajah Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Sivashanmugam For the Respondents : Mr.G.Karthikeyan Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.K.R.Vinodhinee for respondents 1 to 4 Mrs.R.Anitha Spl. Government Pleader for respondents 5 to 7 W.A.Nos.2298 and 2299 of 2021: For the Appellant : Mr.N.Manoharan For the Respondents : Mr.G.Karthikeyan Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.K.R.Vinodhinee for respondents 1 to 4 W.A.Nos.2348 and 2371 of 2021: For the Appellants : Mrs.V.Srimathi For the Respondents : Mr.G.Karthikeyan Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.K.R.Vinodhinee for respondent No.1 Mrs.R.Anitha Spl. Government Pleader for respondents 6 to 8 in W.A.No.2348/2021 and respondents 2 to 8 in W.A.No.2371/2021 No Appearance for respondents 2, 3 to 5 in W.A.No.2348/2021 W.A.No.2068 of 2021: For the Appellant : Mr.K.Balu For the Respondents : Mr.G.Karthikeyan Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.K.R.Vinodhinee for respondent No.1 Mr.D.Ravichandran for respondents 2 to 6 Mr.Abdul Saleem for Mr.M.Vijayamehanath for respondent No.7 No appearance for respondent Nos.8 to 33, 35 to 41 and 42 W.P.No.16520 of 2021: For the Petitioner : Mr.T.P.Prabakaran For the Respondents : Mr.G.Karthikeyan Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.K.R.Vinodhinee for respondent No.1 Mr.Su.Srinivasan for respondents 2 to 4 COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice) W.A.Nos.1179, 2298 and 2348 of 2021 have been filed against the common order of the learned Single Judge dated

25.3.2021 passed in Review Application No.56 of 2020 in W.P.No.35530 of 2019. W.A.Nos.2299, 2371 and 2068 of 2021 have been filed against the common order dated 25.03.2021 made in W.P.No.9385 of 2020.

¶2W.P.No.16520 of 2021 has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the compensation due and payable to the petitioner pursuant to the award passed by the sixth respondent vide proceedings in Rc.G4/2/2016 dated 23.4.2019 in respect of wet lands situated in New Survey No.53/5, Chennasamudram Village, Walaja Taluk, Ranipet District having an extent of 350 sq. mt.

¶3Mr.N.L.Rajah, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.1179 of 2021, submitted that, while disposing of the Review Application No.56 of 2020, the learned Single Judge has withdrawn the order dated 10.3.2020 passed in W.P.No.35530 of 2019 in view of the subsequent developments that have taken place in this case and the said finding arrived at by the learned Single Judge is not legally sustainable as the lands in question belonging to the appellant were acquired for establishing a Toll Plaza by the National Highways Authority of India. He would submit that the competent authority before passing the award conducted a detailed enquiry and the name of the appellant was also found in the enquiry notice and after hearing the parties, the competent authority has determined the compensation payable to each of the land owners.

¶4Learned senior counsel further submitted that after acquiring the lands based on the award enquiry and after passing of the award and determination of the compensation payable to the land owners, the lands in question cannot remain un-utilized, denying the benefit to use the land by the land owners for a period of six long years, inasmuch as when the lands in question were acquired by issuance of notification under Section 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956, till date the owners of the lands have been deprived of utilizing the lands. As a result, the land owners have been subjected to huge prejudice, therefore, as per Section 93(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, "the Act of 2013"), the respondent authorities should be directed to determine the amount of compensation due for damages suffered by the land owners in consequence of not allowing them to use the lands.

¶5Arguing further, learned senior counsel contended that after a passage of six long years from the date of vesting of the lands, filing an affidavit dated 20.4.2023 by the Project Director, National Highways Authority of India before this Court expressing their willingness to return the lands to the land owners in view of the fraudulent activities involved in this case cannot be accepted at all. In fact, the affidavit filed by the Project Director to return the lands to the land owners is running contrary to Section 93(2) of the Act of 2013. Therefore, the affidavit dated 20.4.2023 filed by the Project Director is liable to be rejected and the respondent authorities are to be directed to pay compensation to the land owners as per Section 93(2) of the Act of 2013.

¶6By referring to Section 48-B of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act of 1894"), Mr.N.L.Rajah, learned senior counsel, emphatically argued that the law makers were clear in their wisdom that if for any reason the lands acquired from the land owners are going to be returned, the Collector shall determine the amount of compensation due to the damage suffered by the owners in consequence of the notice or of any proceedings thereunder and shall pay such amount to the persons interested together with all costs reasonably incurred by them in the prosecution of the proceedings under the Act of 1894. Therefore, when Section 48-B of the Act of 1894 and Section 93(2) of the Act of 2013 stipulate payment of compensation due to the damage suffered by the owner of the land, the affidavit now filed by the Project Director has to be rejected outright and a direction may be issued to refer the matter to the Arbitrator.

¶7The learned counsel appearing for the appellants in W.A.Nos.2298, 2299, 2068 and 2348 of 2021 have adopted the arguments made learned senior counsel for the appellant in W.A.No.1179 of 2021. The learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.Nos.2298, 2299, 2068 and 2348 of 2021 and the writ petitioner in W.P.No.16520 of 2021 have made a prayer to refer the matter to the Arbitrator for determination of the compensation due to the damage suffered by the land owners.

¶8On the other hand, Mr.G.Karthikeyan, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India and the National Highways Authority of India, submitted that the contention of the learned senior counsel Mr.N.L.Rajah that under Section 48-B of the Act of 1894 and Section 93(2) of the Act of 2013 the land owners should be compensated for the damages suffered by them is misconceived, inasmuch as the lands in question sought to be acquired though were notified, till date, the respondent authorities have not taken physical possession of the lands and the possession of the lands vests with the land owners only. Therefore, the question of determination of compensation for the period from the date of issuance of notification under Section 3D of the Act till date does not arise.

¶9Arguing further, Mr.G.Karthikeyan, learned senior counsel submitted that the officers working in the respondent department have manipulated the draft award as though it is a final award, when the fact remains that it was neither signed and approved nor finalised by the competent authority. When the award has not been finalized by the competent authority in the manner known to law and secondly the lands in question have not been taken over by the authorities and no amount of compensation deposited in the name of land owners, the respondent authorities, particularly, the Project Director has filed the affidavit dated 20.04.2023 expressing their willingness to return the lands in view of the fraudulent activities involved in this case. Therefore, the appellants cannot compel the respondent authorities to take over the lands in question when the respondent authorities are not willing to utilize the said lands. Finally, the learned senior counsel submitted that since the appellants are demanding more compensation for the lands in question, they are free to sell away the lands for higher price.

¶10We find some force in the submission made by learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent National Highways Authority of India. When the competent authority, namely the Project Director of the National Highways Authority of India, has filed an affidavit dated 20.04.2023 conveying their willingness to return the lands to the land owners in view of the fraudulent activities involved in this case, the said authority cannot be compelled to take over the lands. Since the lands in question have not been taken over physically by the respondent authorities, we are unable to accept the submission made by Mr.N.L.Rajah, learned senior counsel that the land owners should be suitably compensated for the loss suffered by them and for which the matter has to be referred to the Arbitrator. In our considered view, Section 48-B of the Act of 1894 and Section 93(2) of the Act of 2013 cannot be applied to the present case, as there are allegations of fraud based on which the learned Single Judge had allowed the Review Application. When it is alleged by the National Highways Authority of India that guideline value records were manipulated to fictitiously show the value ten times higher thereby costing roughly about Rs.500 crore for establishment of the Toll Plaza and when the appellants/land owners are contending that their properties are really worth such huge amount, the above is the best course which will render justice to the parties in the peculiar facts of the case. In this regard, the affidavit filed on behalf of the National Highways Authority of India is recorded and paragraphs (4) and (5) of the affidavit are extracted hereunder for ready reference: "4. I further submit that the Competent Authority of NHAI, New Delhi has conveyed its willingness to return the land to the land owners in view of the alleged fraudulent activities involved in this case and in the facts and special circumstances of this case.

¶5I submit that, I place my submission before this Hon'ble Court to state that, NHAI has no objection to quash the Notification under Section 3D (1) dated

05.06.2018 and 18.07.2018 of the National Highways Act, 1956."

¶11In the result, W.A.Nos.1179, 2298, 2299, 2348, 2371 and 2068 of 2021 and W.P.No.16520 of 2021 are disposed of on the following terms:

(i) The notifications issued under Section 3D (1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 dated

05.06.2018 and 18.07.2018 shall stand quashed.

(ii)It is made clear that the land owners are entitled to make use of the lands in question and mutation of revenue records, if any, made in the name of the respondent authorities shall forthwith be restored back in the name of the appellants/original owners of the lands, in any event, not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(iii) Needless to mention that the disposal of the writ appeals and the writ petition will not come in the way of the Government of Tamil Nadu for proceeding further with the disciplinary enquiry/other proceedings against the erring officials.

(iv) There will be no order as to costs.

(v) Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.13089, 15136, 7490 and 14612 of 2021 are closed. (T.R., ACJ.) (D.B.C., J.)

24.04.2023 Index : Yes/No bbr To

1.The Secretary, Union of India, National Highways Department, New Delhi.

2.The Chairman, National Highways Authority of India, G-5 and 6 Sector, 10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 015.

3.The Regional Officer, National Highways Authority of India, PIU Sri Tower 3rd Floor, DP.34 (SP) Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

4.The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, Project Implementation Unit – Kanchipuram, No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram West – 600 045.

5.The District Collector, Collector Office, Vellore District.

6.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LANH), Sathuvachari, Vellore-9, Vellore District.

7.The Competent Authority & The Special District Revenue Officer (LA), National Highways, Kancheepuram District.

8.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.

9.The Principal Secretary to Government, Highways and Minor Ports Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9.

10.The District Collector, Ranipet District, Ranipet. W.A.Nos.1179gofg2021getc. T.RAJA,gACJ. AND D.BHARATHAgCHAKRAVARTHY,gJ. bbr g W.A.Nos.1179,g2298,g2299,g2348g2371gandg ggg2gg068gofg2021gandgWgg .P.No.16520gofg2021 ggggg

24.04.2023 Pageg29gofg29