Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Amitabh Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2 and Ms. Samidha, learned counsel for respondent no.3.
Notice to respondent nos.4 to 10 is dispensed with.
By means of present writ petition, petitioner has prayed the following relief:-
"(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 14.09.2020 so far related to the petitioner, i.e. item no.7 of the same and order dated 01.05.2018 ( by summoning the same) by which opposite party no.2 has passed orders to proceed for releasing the payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of the Gata No.680,648 situated at Village- Haliyapur, Pargana- Isauli, District- Sultanpur.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 15.10.2020 relating to the petitioner i.e. Gata No.648 & 680 of Village-Haliyapur, Pargana- Isauli, District- Sultanpur, by which opposite party no.2 directed to complete the proceedings in order to make payment, pursuant to the aforesaid impugned orders under herein challenged in against the acquisition of the aforesaid Gatas in question."
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing to the opposite party no.2, to send the matter before principle civil court of competent jurisdiction under Section 3H (4) of the National High Act,1956 relating to gata no.677 and 680 of Village- Haliyapur, Pargana- Isauli, District Sultanpur."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased the land Khsara no.680,648 alongwith Gata No.677,2824,3475 and 1191 of Village-Haliyapur from the owners Ahrwa Baksh Singh, Mata Baksh Singh and Ram Karan Singh by registered sale-deed. The proceedings vide Case no.736 of 1999 were initiated against the petitioner for stamp deficiency. Although, the petitioner deposited entire stamp duty within the time prescribed however, in auction proceedings was confirmed and the sale certificate was issued in favor of opposite party no.4 and thereafter land was recorded in favor of opposite parties no.5 to 8.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on 13.09.2012 the aforesaid land was recorded in the name of Ashok Kumar Singh and subsequently in the name of opposite parties no.5 to 10. The aforesaid sale certificate dated 03.07.2012 and order dated 13.09.2012 regarding entry in the Khatauni were challenged by the petitioner by filing Writ Petition No.2297(MS) of 2014. The said writ petition is still pending.
In the meantime, Land Gata No. 680,648 of Village-Haliyapur, Pargana- Isauli, District- Sultanpur was notified for acquisition under Section 3A and 3D on 16.02.2018 and 06.08.2018 respectively under National Highway Act,1956 (herein after referred to as 'Act'). On 09.04.2018, petitioner filed objection before opposite party no.2. Thereafter on 05.09.2018 petitioner approached before opposite party no.2 alongwith his reminder objection dated 05.09.2018 with request to stop the release of payment of compensation against the related gatas.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has dispute only relating to release of the compensation of his 1/4th share of Gata nos.677 and 680.
He further submits that apportionment of the share is yet to be decided by competent civil court and for adjudication of apportionment, opposite party no.2 is not competent authority and the power is conferred in the Principle Civil Court having territorial jurisdiction. The petitioner has not afforded any opportunity of hearing by the opposite party no.2 while deciding the objection vide order dated 01.05.2018.
Lastly, it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that order has been passed without application of mind, arbitrarily and beyond jurisdiction.
Per contra, Sri Amitabh Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel and Ms.Samidha, learned counsel for respondent no.3 submit that the amount determined under section 3G is to be deposited with the competent authority and after the amount has been deposited under sub- section (1) of Section 3H of the National Highway Act, 1956, the competent authority pays the amount to the person entitled and when more than one person claims to be interested in the amount deposited under sub- section (1) of Section 3H of the National Highway Act, 1956, the competent authority shall determine the persons who in its opinion are entitled to receive the amount and after such determination, in case any dispute regarding apportionment of amount,the competent authority shall refer the dispute for decision to Principle Civil Court having original jurisdiction within the limit the land is situated .
Learned counsel for the respondents submit that matter is still pending at the stage of sub- section (3) of Section 3H of the aforesaid Act, 1956. The said section reads as under:-
"(3) Where several person claim to be interested in the amount deposited under sub-section(1) , the competent authority shall determine the persons who in its opinion are entitled to receive the amount payable to each of them."
It is further contended on behalf of the respondents that after determination of amount under Section 3G of the Act, petitioner has not filed any objection before the competent authority.
Replying this, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the court for his objection dated 07.11.2020 which has been duly received on 10.11.2020 and is on record alongwith Annexure no.9 to the writ petition. He submits that without deciding the objection of the petitioner under Section (3) of Section 3H of the Act, the authority is going to disburse the compensation to the private respondents and once the amount is received by the private respondents, petitioner will not be able to recover the same.
Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, we dispose of the writ petition with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties with the direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh objection before opposite party no.2 bringing on record the entire facts within one week from today and if such objection is filed by the petitioner, the respondent no.2 shall proceed to decide the same as per law after giving notice to concerned stake holders/ private respondents within three months thereafter by passing a reasoned and speaking orders.
Till the objection is finally decided, the impugned orders contained in this writ petition shall not be given effect to so far as they relate to the petitioner pertaining to Gata No.648 and 680 of Village-Haliyapur, Pargana- Isauli, District- Sultanpur.
We made it clear that this Court has not stayed the remaining part of the impugned orders.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 dk/