HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 7248 of 2025 Court No. - 9 HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J. 1. The writ Court on 10.07.2025 in Writ-C No. 21642 of 2025 passed the following order:- "1. Heard Shri Rateesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for State respondents and Shri Anurag Yadav for National Highway Authority of India (in short "NHAI"). Shri R.K. Jaiswal appears for Union of India and vakalatnama filed by him has been taken on record. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a direction to respondents to make payment of compensation of additionally acquired area of 0.075 hect. in excess to published area of 0.125 hect. of plot no.112/3 situated in Village Nagla Umed, Tehsil Sasani, Distt. Hathras and for a further direction to respondent no.2-District Magistrate, Hathras to decide the representation/ reminder of the petitioner dated 07.05.2025 within stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is recorded bhumidhar with transferable right of plot no.112/3 area 0.2062 hect. situated in Village Nagdla Ummed, Tehsil Sasani, Distt. Hathras. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on relevant khatauni of Fasli Year 1430-1435, which is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. A notification was published under Section 3A and 3D of National Highway Act on 02.11.2021 for construction of national Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rateesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anurag Yadav Chandra Pal .....Applicant(s) Dr. Basant Agrawal, Additional District Magistrate (Finance / Revenue) / Competent Officer, Land Acquisition National Highway Authority Of India Project And Another .....Opposite Party(s) highway. It is alleged that even though part of land of the petitioner had been acquired but the NHAI had utilised the excess land. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on the communication dated 08.08.2022 sent by the Addl. District Magistrate (F&R), Hathras to the Project Director, NHAI, wherein it is informed that after verifying the record and measurement on the spot, it had been found that excess land had been utilised for laying the national highway and further request was made to Project Director, NHAI for reconciling the record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in this backdrop, submits that on spot revenue officials had measured the land and admittedly excess land had been utilised by NHAI in laying the national highway. But inspite of the report dated 08.08.2022, till date the actual compensation has not been paid qua excess land, which has been utilised by NHAI. Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer for a direction to NHAI to ensure adequate compensation in lieu of land, which has been utilised by NHAI. 5. Learned counsel for NHAI has resisted the relief on the premise that National Highway Act (in short "Act") is self-contained, wherein full fledged mechanism is provided. In case the petitioner is aggrieved, he has remedial forum under the Act to press the relief before the Arbitrator. So far as communication dated 08.08.2022 is concerned, at present, he is not in a position to controvert the said communication. As such some breathing time may be accorded to address in this regard. 6. Considering the factual situation, we are not inclined to adjudicate in the instant matter at this stage. Once revenue officials had made detailed survey on the spot and made necessary communication in this regard to Project Director, NHAI on 08.08.2022, no justifiable response has been shown to us that inspite of notice to NHAI what remedial measures had been taken by NHAI. 7. In the facts and circumstances, we find that in response to the communication dated 08.08.2022, the competent authority of NHAI must consider the grievance of the petitioner and, if necessary, again survey on spot in the presence of the petitioner and in case any excess land has been utilised by NHAI for laying the national highway, definitely the appropriate order will be passed in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of production of CAPL No. 7248 of 2025 2 certified copy of this order but certainly after giving fullest opportunity to the petitioner. 8. 8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. " 2. In the compliance affidavit filed by National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), in para no. 13, it has been stated that joint team inspected the spot and measurement was done on 23.03.2026. A report was prepared on 24.03.2026, which has been brought on record as annexure-6 to compliance affidavit. The State in its compliance affidavit filed on 26.03.2026, in para no. 12, has stated about the joint inspection done and report submitted on 24.03.2026 and representation of the applicant dated 04.08.2025 was decided on 25.03.2026, copy of which has been appended as annexure-6 to compliance affidavit filed by State. 3. In view of said fact, as the order of writ Court was only to the extent to carry out the survey if needed again in terms of the communication dated 08.08.2022 which the authorities have done and have conducted joint survey and submitted report and opposite party no. 1 has decided the representation, no case for contempt is made out. 4. The contempt application stands dismissed. 5. Contempt notice stands discharged. 6. However, in case, the applicant is aggrieved by the order passed by opposite party, he may approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance, if so advised. April 23, 2026 (V. S. SINGH) CAPL No. 7248 of 2025 3 (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIDYA SAGAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad