HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 31257 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Vaibhav Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent no.1. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred for a direction to the respondent to declare the rehabilitation and resettlement award and its monetary benefits of the petitioners as per section 31, 38 and 25 of the Second Schedule of The Right To Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in identical facts and circumstances, a Co-ordinate Bench had passed a detailed order on 30.07.2024 in Writ-C No. 24410 of 2024 (Dharmendra Kumar Prajapati v. Union of India And 2 Others). The operative part of the order passed in the said writ petition is as follows:- "5. This Court, recently, while deciding Writ C No. 13489 of 2024 (Rampal Singh and 12 others vs National Highway Authority of India and 2 others) by order dated 24.04.2024, considered identical submission made on behalf of N.H.A.I. and observed as under: "6. Section 23 read with Section 31 of the Act, 2013 empowers the Collector to pass rehabilitation and resettlement award for each affected family in terms of the entitlements provided in the second schedule. Under Section 3(g) of the Act, 2013 the Collector has been defined thus:- Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nanda Kumar Shukla, Pranav Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Vaibhav Tripathi Radheyshyam And 3 Others .....Petitioner(s) Executive Engineer, N.H. Division, Pwd, Varanasi And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) "(g) Collector means the Collector of a revenue district, and includes a Deputy Commissioner and any officer specially designated by the appropriate Government to perform the functions of a Collector under this Act;" 7. It is evident from the definition of Collector that it includes any Officer specially designated by the appropriate Government to perform the functions of the Collector under the said Act. 8. In NH Act, the power to declare award is conferred upon the competent authority under Section 3G. The competent authority has been defined under Section 3(a) of the Act of 1956 as follows:- "(a) "competent authority" means any person or authority authorised by the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, to perform the functions of the competent authority for such area as may be specified in the notification;" 9. It is not disputed that the Central Government had issued notification on 28.08.2015 under Section 105(3) of the Act, 2013 directing that the provisions relating to the second and third schedule shall apply to all cases of land acquisitions under the enactments specified in the fourth schedule to the said Act. The effect of said notification is to extend the beneficial provisions of the Act, 2013 to the acquisitions made under the NH Act. However, the machinery provided for holding enquiry and determining compensation does not get altered. The same is still to be done in the manner and by the authority stipulated under the Statutes under which acquisition was done. We, therefore, find force in the submission of learned counsel for NHAI that in matters relating to acquisitions under NH Act, it would be the competent authority, as defined under Section 3(a) of NH Act, which would be empowered to examine the claims pertaining to rehabilitation and resettlement and make award accordingly and not the Collector of the district." 6. In view of above, the instant petition stands disposed of with direction to the Competent Authority under National Highways Act, 1956 to proceed with the exercise of examining the claims pertaining to rehabilitation and resettlement and declare award on the said aspect having regard to the provisions of Chapter V of the Act, 2013 within twelve weeks from the date of the communication of the instant order." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the instant matter is squarely covered with the aforesaid judgment and the writ petition may also be disposed of in the light of Dharmendra Kumar Prajapati (supra). 5. So far as the factual and legal aspect of the matter, the same is not disputed by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel as well as counsel for respondent no.1 6. Having regard to the facts of the case and the submissions made, we WRIC No. 31257 of 2025 2 dispose of the instant petition in terms of Dharmendra Kumar Prajapati (supra). September 10, 2025 SP/ WRIC No. 31257 of 2025 3 (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURYA PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad