PREM NATH PANDEY AND 2 OTHERS v. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/14018/2025 · 2025-05-05
Anish Kumar Gupta, Manoj Kumar Gupta
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48243 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48243 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71988-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14018 of 2025 Petitioner :- Prem Nath Pandey And 2 Others Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pawan Kumar Shukla,Rakesh Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C. Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. The petitioners have challenged the gazette notification dated 20.09.2022 issued under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 and also the final notification dated 09.12.2024 issued under Section 3D of the said Act. They have also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to decide their representation dated 08.02.2025. By the said representation made to various authorities the petitioners have prayed for acquisition being made equally on both sides from the center of the road. It is alleged that on the side on which the petitioners are having their lands about fifty families are living and they would be thrown out of employment in case the land is acquired.
2. Under the Scheme of the Act after issuance of preliminary notification under Section 3A, a detailed procedure is prescribed for inviting objection from the affected persons in relation to proposed acquisition. The objection has to be made in writing within 21 days from the date of notification under Section 3A of the Act. In case, any objection is filed, the Competent Authority is obligated to decide the same after providing opportunity of hearing to the objector. Thereafter, notification under Section 3D is issued and upon issuance of such declaration the land vests absolutely with Central Government free from all encumbrances.
3. There is no provision under the Act for deciding any objection preferred by any party after declaration of notification under Section 3D of the Act except at the stage of inquiry for declaration of award.
4. In such circumstances, we find no good ground to interfere with the impugned notifications or to direct the respondents to decide the representation dated 08.02.2025 made after issuance of the declaration under Section 3D of the Act.
5. The petition lacks merit and is dismissed. (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 6.5.2025 gp Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad