Mahadev Kashyap vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that the grievance of the petitioners regarding inadequate and arbitrary compensation, and the alleged differential treatment for similar properties, needs to be addressed individually. As per Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, if the amount determined by the competent authority is not acceptable, it shall be determined by an arbitrator appointed by the Central Government. The Court noted that the Additional Commissioner of Bilaspur Division has been appointed as such an Arbitrator. Therefore, the Court directed each petitioner to raise their dispute individually before the Additional Commissioner within two weeks. The Additional Commissioner is expected to decide these disputes objectively by passing a speaking order within 90 days of receiving the applications. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.
Facts
The petitioners, six individuals, are aggrieved by the compensation awarded for their properties acquired for the construction of National Highway No. 149-B. They contend that the compensation was not quantified according to the State Government's Guidelines for 2018-2019 and that different yardsticks were applied to similar adjacent properties, resulting in arbitrary and unequal compensation. The properties were acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956. The learned ASG informed the court that the Additional Commissioner of Bilaspur Division has been appointed as an Arbitrator to determine compensation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the compensation awarded for the acquisition of the petitioners' properties for National Highway No. 149-B is inadequate and arbitrary, violating the State Government's Guidelines for 2018-2019? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of fair compensation and statutory guidelines). Petitioner's argument: The compensation awarded is inadequate and arbitrary because it does not adhere to the State Government's Guidelines for 2018-2019. Furthermore, dissimilar compensation rates have been applied to similar adjacent properties, indicating a lack of uniformity and fairness in the quantification process. Revenue/State's argument: Not recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 3G(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1581 of 2021
Mahadev Kashyap S/o Bhulu Ram Aged About 64 Years R/o Koshmanda, Tehsil- Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
Rathram Kashyap S/o Futulal Kashypa Aged About 54 Years R/o Koshmanda, Tehsil- Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
Dwarika Dhiwar S/o Chhedulal Aged About 43 Years R/o Koshmanda, Tehsil- Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
Tirithram Rathore S/o Bed Ram Aged About 43 Years R/o Koshmanda, Tehsil- Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
Pacho Bai W/o Ramdas Aged About 65 Years R/o Koshmanda, Tehsil- Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
Ramdulari D/o Mohanlal Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Kamrid, Tehsil- Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioners Versus
Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways Transport Bhawan, 1, Parliament Street New Delhi-110001, District : New Delhi, Delhi
Project Director National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) Project Implementation Unit D-61, HIG-1, Abhilasha Parisar Behind New Bus Stand Tifra Bilaspur, Dis
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.