Law Firm in Chandigarh. Lex Commerci

HC ruling: National Highways are Backbone of Economy and Lifeline of the Nation.

HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA RULES THAT NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ARE BACKBONE OF THE ECONOMY AND LIFELINE OF THE NATION; AN INDIVIDUAL’S HARDSHIP CANNOT STALL OF CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES OF PARAMOUNT NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.

The Courts have time and again acknowledged the role of expert bodies and have categorically observed that the work of such bodies shall not be interfered by the Courts unless there is an apparent illegality. One such progressive decision has been given by Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in its recent decision in the case of “Kimat Rai vs. Union of India” [Judgment dated 19.04.2018 in Civil Writ Petition 8514 OF 2017]

FACTS AND DISPUTE

Certain landowners had challenged the notifications under Sections 3-A and 3-D of the National Highways Act, 1956, as well as all subsequent proceedings taken in pursuance of the said notifications for acquisition of land by the NHAI for widening/four laning and operation of Laddowal bypass under NHDP-VII in the State of Punjab. The prime ground of challenge was that therewas existing construction on the acquired land and as such, the NHAI should seek alternative land for road alignment, since an alternative road alignment is possible. It was also argued by the petitioners that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to them before deciding their representations and that the amount of compensation was not sufficient.

NHAI took a stand that the road alignment had been designed on the basis of Detailed Project Report by an empanelled consultant of the MoRT&H, and was envisaged and designed keeping in view the geometrics of the road, road safety during construction and other such factors. It was argued that change of alignment for the benefit of an individual cannot be considered, as any modification in alignment shall be contrary to public interest in terms of increased costs and time of construction. Further, the notification under Section 3-D of the National Highways had been passed after deciding objections filed by landowners in accordance with the procedure under the Act, and no specific right of hearing was envisaged thereunder while deciding representations. It was further argued that the acquisition had been made as per provisions of the Act, and that an alternative remedy was provided under the National Highways Act, 1956 for challenging amount of compensation.

COURT OBSERVATIONS AND DECISION –

The Hon’ble Court, while placing reliance upon thelandmark judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in “Union of India vsKushalaShetty”¹ and “M/s AV Fasteners Pvt Ltd & Ors vs Union of India & Ors.”², noticed that “…NHAI is a professionally managed statutory body having expertise in the field of development and maintenance of National Highways. The projects involving construction of new highways and widening and development of the existing highways, which are vital for development of infrastructure in the country, are entrusted to experts in the field of highways. It comprises of persons having vast knowledge and expertise in the field of highway development and maintenance. NHAI prepares and implements projects relating to development and maintenance of National Highways after thorough study by experts in different fields. Detailed project reports are prepared keeping in view the relative factors including intensity of heavy vehicular traffic and larger public interest. The Courts are not at all equipped to decide upon the viability and feasibility of the particular project and whether the particular alignment would subserve the larger public interest. In such matters, the scope of judicial review is very limited.”

In light of such position, it was held that“So far as construction of building on the plot in question is concerned, be that as it may, if the building is obstructing the widening of the National Highway, we have no reason to doubt that such building must also pave way as an individual's interest is always outweighed by the larger public interest involved in the construction of National Highway. There is no gainsaying that the construction of bypass in such locality is utmost necessary and the acquisition of land/property for the construction of bypass or widening of National highway, deserves to be viewed keeping in view the wider public and national interest.”The Hon’ble Court further noted that the approach of the landowners in suggesting acquisition of property of other land owners to save their own property was against public interest.

It has, thus, been upheld that construction of National Highways, being an enterprise in the right direction in the larger public interest to strengthen the backbone of the economy, the State’s bona fides are beyond doubt, and an individual’s hardship, howsoever genuine, has no place to stop or stall construction of public utilities of national importance.

¹ (2011) 12 SCC 69.
² AIR 2014 (P&H) 178.

Authorship of Adv. Raghujeet Madan, Adv. Irshaan Singh Kakkar and Simran Syal