NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT, 1956 (NH ACT) — Sections 2(2), 3A, 3C, 3D, 3G, 3H
RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 (RFCTLRR ACT) — Section 23, 26
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA — Articles 14, 19, 21, 300-A
Land Acquisition – Challenge to Acquisition Proceedings for Greenfield National Highway (NH-365BG) – Non-declaration under Section 2(2) of NH Act – Procedural Compliance – Market Value Determination – Land Conversion.
A. National Highways Act, 1956 — Section 2(2) and 3A Notification: Challenge to acquisition proceedings on the ground that the road, prior to the Section 3A Notification, was not formally declared a National Highway under Section 2(2) of the NH Act; contention that the entire acquisition process is ultra vires and a colourable exercise of power to evade the RFCTLRR Act.
B. Procedural Due Process — Section 3C and 3G: Allegation that the Competent Authority failed to conduct a proper enquiry, provide a reasoned order on objections filed under Section 3C, and failed to furnish a copy of the final Award, violating the principles of natural justice and statutory mandate.
C. Compensation and Market Value — Section 23, 26 (RFCTLRR Act): Contention that the acquired lands were converted to non-agricultural lands prior to the Section 3A Notification, requiring the market value to be determined based on non-agricultural rates; challenge to the multiplication factor used in compensation calculation.
D. Alternative Remedy: Plea by Respondent NHAI that the petitioners have an effective alternative remedy to seek enhanced compensation by invoking arbitration under Section 3G(5) of the NH Act.
Final Order: Writ Petition disposed of; acquisition proceedings upheld; petitioners directed to seek recourse before the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) for compensation disputes.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
* * *
WRIT PETITION NO.10280 OF 2022
Between:
# Mullapudi Yamini Pushkarini and Others …Petitioners
And
$ Union of India and Others …Respondents
Date of Judgment pronounced : 20-06-2025
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.KRISHNA MOHAN
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No
may be allowed to see the judgments?
2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No
to Law Reporters/Journals:
3. Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No
Of the Judgment?
_________________________
JUSTICE B.KRISHNA MOHAN
2025:APHC:22777
2
* THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.KRISHNA MOHAN
+ WRIT PETITION NO.10280 OF 2022
% Dated: 20-06-2025
Between:
# Mullapudi Yamini Pushkarini and Others …Petitioners
And
$ Union of India and Others …Respondents
! Counsel for the Petitioner(s) : M.R.K.CHAKRAVARTHY
^ Counsel for Respondent(s) : 1. CHAUDARY AND CHAUDARY ADVOCATES
AND SOLICITORS LAW FIRM
2. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
<GIST:
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred:
1. (2021) 3 SCC 572
2. (2011) 10 SCC 714
3. (2012) SCC Online AP 148
4. (2005) 13 SCC 477
5. 2005(7) SC 627
6. 2023 SCC OnLine J&K 247
7. (2022) SCC Online SC 362
8. 2021 SCC Online SC 1247
9. (1997)1 SCC 134
10.(2011) 12 SCC 69
11.MANU/PH/0150/2022
2025:APHC:22777
3
APHC010180142022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3233]
FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 10280/2022
Between:
1. MULLAPUDI YAMINI PUSHKARINI,, W/O M.ASHOK AGED ABOUT 29
YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, RIO D.NO.3-79, YERRAMPETA,
KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH
2. PAKALAPATI SHYAM KRISHNA,, S/O P.NAGESWARA RAO AGED ABOUT
41 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, RIO D.NO.2-141, YERRAMPETA
VILLAGE, KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH
3. MARNI LOKESH CHOWDARY,, S/O M.V.V.BHASKARA RAO AGED ABOUT
30 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, RIO D.NO.1-49, YERRAMPETA VILLAGE,
KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P
4. KODAVATI RAMA KRISHNA,, S/O K.BULLIRAJU AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
OCC CULTIVATION, RIO D.NO.5-41, KANNAYAGUDEM VILLAGE,
KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P
5. JAMMULA UDAYA BHASKAR,, S/O J.VENKATA DURGA RAO, AGED
ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, RIO D.NO.5-5,
KANNAYYAGUDEM VILLAGE, KOYYALAGUDEM MANDAL, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
2025:APHC:22777
4
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF
SHIPPING ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS TRANSPORT BHAWAN,
1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY (LAND ACQUISITION) SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH,
3. THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, REP BY ITS
CHAIRMAN, 05 AND 6, SECTOR-10, DWARKA, NEW DELHI - 110075.
4. NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PROJECT DIRECTOR, NHAI, NU, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI.
5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT,
COLLECTORATE, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI.
6. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY LA, NH-365 BG AND JOINT COLLECTOR
(VS, WS AND D), ELURU, WEST GODAVARI, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased
toIt is therefore prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order
or Direction, more particularly one in the Writ of Mandamus, to declare the
Notifications, Award Enquiry Notices, Award, Award Notices, Environment
Clearance (impact assessment) issued under the provisions of the National
Highways Act, 1956 and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, EIA Notification, 2006 vide
(i) SO.No. 1388 (E) published in Gazette No. 1240 dated 27.04.2020 and under
Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 published in Hans India, Andhra
Jyothi daily newspapers dated 08.05.2020 (ii) S.O.No.4189(E), MORT and H dated
23.11.2020 published in Gazette No.3687 under Section 3D of the NH Act (iii)
Public. Notice Rc.No. 1/202020/CALA and JCNHAI/365BG, dated 08.08.2020
published in Praja Sakthi and Hans India newspapers on 20.01.2021 under Section
3(G)(3) of the NH Act (iv) Award Enquiry Notices issued vide R.O.C.No.1/NH-365
BG/2020 dated 20.01.2021 and 23.01.2021 (v) Award.Nos.6/2021/NH-365 BG,
7/2021 /NH-365 BG, dated 15.03. 2021 of the Sixth Respondent under Section 23
of the RFCTLRR Act R/w Section 3G of the NH Act (vi) Award Notices issued vide
Roc.No.01/2020/NH-365 BG dated 17.07. 2021 under Section 3H(2) of the NH Act,
2025:APHC:22777
5
1956 and Section 26 of the RFCTLRR Act (vii) Proceedings in File No. 10-
51/2020-IA.III, dated 23.12.2021 issued for the alleged public purpose for building
(widening/two-lane with paved shoulder/four laning etc.), maintenance,
management and operation of Khammam - Devarapalli Greenfield National Highway
(yet to be Assigned) in the stretch of land from Km 148.285 to Km 220.586 in the
district .of West Godavari (office of District Collector Eluru) in the state of Andhra
Pradesh issued in respect of the Petitioners land ad-measuring 5909 Sq. Mts (Ac.1-
46 Cents), 1255 Sq.Mts (A.c.0- 27 Cents) situated in RS Nos 37/2, 31/2 of
Rajavaram Village, 2833 Sq.Mts (Ac.0- 70 Cents) situated in RS.No.233/1B2, 526
Sq.Mts (Ac. 0-12 Cents) situated in Rs No.233/1C2, 40 Sq.Mts (Ac. 0-01 Cent)
situated in RS.No. 194/4A, 1336 Sq.Mts (Ac. 0-33 Cents) situated in RS.No.194/5A,
648 Sq.Mts (Ac. 0-16 Cents) situated in RS.No.194/6, 1781 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-44 Cents)
situated in RS.No.194/3B, 1538 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-38 cents) situated in RS.No.195/4A,
3278 (Ac.0-81 Cents) situated in RS.No. 195/2B, 122 Sq.Mts (Ac. 0-03 Cents)
situated in . 194'7A, 41 Sq.Mts(Ac. 0-01 Cents) situated in RS.No. 194/8A of
Eduvadalapalem Village, 17928 Sq.Mts (Ac.4-41 Cents) situated in RS.No.84/2B,
10719 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-65 Cents) situated in RS.No.88/1B, 8215 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-02
Cents) situated in RS.No. 109/2, 607 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-14 Cents) situated.. in RS.No.
108/2F1 of Kannaigudem Village all of Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari
District as illegal, arbitrary, wholly without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 19,
21 and 300-A of the Constitution and consequently quash the same and pass
such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case Prayer is amended as per the Court Order
dated.30.01.2024 vide order passed in IA No.01 of 2024.
IA NO: 1 OF 2022
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased
to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Gazette No.2888 dated 25.07.2018,
Gazette. No. 1240 dated 27.04.2020 in SO.No.1388 (E) dated 27.04.2020 under
Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 published in Hans India, Andhra
Jyothi daily newspapers dated 08.05.2020, Gazette No.3687 in S.O.No.4189(E),
MORT & H dated 23.11.2020 under Section 3D, Public Notice
Rc.No.1/202020/CALA&JC/ NHAI/365BG, dated 08.08.2020 published in Praja
Sakthi and Hans India news papers on 20.01.2021 under Section 3(G)(3) and
Award Nos.05/2021/N.H.365 BG, 6/2021/ N.H.365 BG and 7/2021/NH-365BG dated
15.03.2021 under Section 3(G)(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 R/w Section
23 & Schedule-I of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition Rehabilitation Act and Resettlement Act, 2013 in respect of the
2025:APHC:22777
6
Petitioners lands to an extent of 5909 Sq.Mts (Ac.l-46 Cents), 1255 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-27
Cents) situated in RS.Nos.37/2, 31/2 of Rajavaram Village, 2833 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-70
Cents) situated in RS.No.233/1B2, 526 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-12 Cents) situated in
RS.No.233/1C2, 40 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-01 Cent) situated in RS.No.194/4A, 1336 Sq.Mts
(Ac.0-33 Cents) situated in RS.No.194/5A, 648 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-16 Cents) situated in
RS.No.194/6, 1781 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-44 Cents) situated in RS.No.194/3B, 1538 Sq.Mts
(Ac.0-38 Cents) situated in RS.No.195/4A, 3278 (Ac.0-81 Cents) situated in
RS.No.195/2B, 122 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-03 Cents) situated in RS.No.194/7A, 41 Sq.Mts
(Ac.0-01 Cents) situated in RS.No.194/8A of Eduvadalapalem Village, 17928
Sq.Mts (Ac.4-41 Cents) situated in RS.No.84/2B, 10719 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-65 Cents)
situated in RS.No.88/1B, 8215 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-02 Cents) situated in RS.No.109/2, 607
Sq.Mts (Ac.O-14 Cents) situated in RS.No.108/2F1 of Kannaigudem Village all the
villages in Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari District including dispossessing
the Petitioners and laying of the Greenfield National Highway NH 365 BG pending
disposal of the above writ petition and to pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2022
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased
to dismiss the writ petition by vacating the interim orders dated 21-04-2022 in IA
1/2022 in WP. 10280/2022
IA NO: 3 OF 2022
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased
to vacate the interim orders dated 21-04-2022 passed in IA 1/2022 in WP.
10280/2022 and dismiss the writ petition
IA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased
to grant leave to the Petitioners to file the Additional Reply Affidavit in the above WP
No.10280 of 2022 and pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2023
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased
to permit the Petitioners to bring on record the Objections dated 22/07/2021 filed at
2025:APHC:22777
7
Public Hearing dated 22/07/2021 at Jangaredygudem as additional documents in
the above Writ Petition No. 10280 of 2022 and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased eased to
permit the Petitioners to amend the Affidavit and the prayer in the Writ Petition as
under; “14. It i.s, therefore, prayed that this Hon'hle Court may he pleased to issue
a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the Writ of Mandamus, to
declare the Notiifcations, Award Enquiry Notices, Award, Award Noiices issued
under the provi.sions ofthe National Highways Act, 1956 and the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 vide: (i) SO.No. 1388 (E) published in Gazeite No. 1240
dated 27.04.2020 and under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956
published in Hans India, Andhra Jyothi daily newspapers dated 08.05.2020, (ii)
S.O.No.4189(E), MORE & LI dated 23.11.2020 published in Gazeite No.3687
under Section 3D of the NH Act, (in) Public Notice Rc. No. 1/202020
CALA&JCNHAI365BG, dated 08. 08.2020 published in Praja Sakthi and Hans India
newspapers on 20.01.2021 under Section 3(G)(3) of the NH Act; (iv) .Award Ijujuiry
Notices is.sued vide R.O.C.No.I NH-365 BG 2020 dated 20.01.2021 and
23.01.2021 (V) Award.Nos.6 2021 NH-365 BG, 7 2021 NH-365 BG, dated 15.03.
2021 of the Sixth Respondent under Section 23 of the RldlTLRR Act R w Section
3G of the NH Act; (VI) .Award Notices issued vide Roc.No.OI 2020 NH-365 BG
dated 17.07. 2021 under Section 3H(2) of the NH Act, 1956 and Section 26 of the
RbCTiRRAct: issued for the alleged public purpose for building (widening two-lane
with paved shoulder four laning etc.,), maintenance, management and operation (f
Khammam - Devarapalli Greenifeld National Highway (yet to he Assigned) in the
sirelch of land from Km 148.285 to Km 220.586 in the district of West Godavari
(ofifce of Di.strict Collector Kluni) in the .state of Andhra Pradesh issued in respect
of the Petitioners land ad-measuring 5909 Sep Mis (Ac. 1-46 Cents), 1255 Sq.Mts
(Ac.O- 27 Cents) .situated in RS Nos 37 2, 31 2 of Rajavaram Village, 2833 Sq.Mts
(Ac.O- 70 Cents) situated in RS.No.233 1B2, 526 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-12 CenLs) situated
in RS.No.233 1C2, 40 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-01 ('em) situated in RS.No. 194 4A, 1336
SepMts (Ac.0-33 Ceni.s) situated in RS.No. 194 5A, 648 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-16 Cents)
situated in RS.No. 194 6, 1781 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-44 Cents) situated in RS.No. 1943B,
1538 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-38 Cents) situated in RS.No.195 4A, 3278 (Ac.0-81 Cents)
situated in RS.No. 195 2B. 122 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-03 Cents) .situated in RS.No. 194 7A,
41 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-01 Cents) sitttated in RS.No. 194 8A of Kdiivadalapalem Village,
17928 Sq.Mts (Ac.4-41 Cents) situated in RS.No.84/2B, 10719 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-65
2025:APHC:22777
8
Cents) situated in RS.No.88 IB, 8215 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-02 Cents) .situated in RS.No.
109 2, 607 Sq.Mts (Ac.O-14 Cents) .Stmated in RS.No. 108. 2FI of Kannaigudem
Village all of Koyyalagitdem Mandal, West Godavari District as tllegal, arbitrary,
wholly without jurisdiction and violative ofArticles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the
Constitution and consequently quash the .same and pa.ss .such other order or
orders as this Hon'hle Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the
ca.se. With the following words and letters: "14. It is, therefore, prayed that this
Hon'hle Court may be pleased to issue a rit, Order or Direction, more paritcnlarly
one in the Writ of Mandamus, to declare the Notiifcations, Award Enquiiy Notices,
Award, Award Notices, Environment Clearance (impact assessment) issued under
the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acc}ui,sition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013, EIA Notification, 2006 vide: (i) SO.No. 1388 (E) puhli.shed
in Gazette No. 1240 dated 27.04.2020 and under Section 3A of the National
Highways Act, 1956 published in Hans India, Andhra Jyothi daily newspapers dated
08.05.2020, (ii) S.O.No.4189(E), MORE N H dated 23.11.2020 published in
Gazette No.3687 under Section 3D of the NH Act, (Hi) Public Notice Rc. No.
1202020 CALA&.IC NHAT365BG. dated 08. 08.2020 published in Praja Saklhi and
Hans India newspapers on 20.01.2021 under Section 3(G)(3) of the NH Act; (iv)
Award Enquiry Notices is.sued vide R.O.C.No.l NH-365 BG 2020 dated 20.01.2021
and 23.01.2021 (v) Award.Nos.6:2021/NH-365 BG, 7 2021 NH-365 BG, dated
15.03. 2021 of the Sixth Re.spondent under Section 23 of the RFCTLRR Act R w
Section 3G of the NH Act; (vi) Award Notices is.sued vide Roc.No.Ol 2020 NH-365
BG dated 17.07. 2021 under Section 3H(2) of the NH Act, 1956 and Section 26 of
the RFCTLRR Act; (vit) Proceedings in File No. 10-5T2020-1A.Ill, dated
23.12.2021; issued for the alleged public purpose for building (widening two-lane
with paved shoulder four laning etc.,), maintenance, management and operation of
Khammam - Devarapalli Greenfield National Highway (yet to beAssigned) in the
stretch of land from Km 148.285 to Km 220.586 in the district of West Godavari
(ofifce of District Collector Eluni) in the state of Andhra Pradesh issued in respect of
the Petitioners land ad-measuring 5909 Sq. Mis (Ac. 1-46 Cents), 1255 Sq.Mts
(Ac.O- 27 Cents) situated in RS Nos 3.72, 31 2 of Rajavaram Village, 2833 Sq.Mts
(Ac.O- 70 Cents) .situated in RS.No.233 1B2, 526 Sq.Mts (Ac.O-12 Cents) situated
in RS.No.233 1C2, 40 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-01 Cent) situated in RS.No. 194 4A, 1336
Sq.Mts (Ac.0-33 Cents) situated in RS.No. 194/5A, 648 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-16 Cents)
situated in RS.No. 194 6, 1781 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-44 Cents) .situated in RS.No. 194 3B,
1538 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-38 Cents) situated in RS.No. 195 4A, 3278 (Ac.0-81 Cents)
situated in RS.No. 195 2B, 122 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-03 Cents) situated in RS.No. 194 7A,
41 Sq.Mts Ac. 0-0J Cent.s) situated in RS.No. 194 8A of Ediivadalapalem Village,
2025:APHC:22777
9
17928 Scj.Mts (Ac.4-41 Cents) situated in RS.No.84 28, 10719 Sq.Mts (Ac.2-65
Cents) situated in RS.No.88 18, 8215 Sq.Mts .(Ac.2-02 Cent.s) .situated in RS.No.
109 2, 607 Sq.Mts (Ac.0-14 Cents) situated in RS.No. 108 2FI of Kannaigudem
Ullage all of Koyyalagudem Mandal, West Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary,
wholly without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the
('onstitution and con.sequently quash the .same and pa.ss such other order or
orders as this Hon'hle Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the
case. and pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased
to permit the Petitioners to bring on record the photographs and market value
certificate annexed to this lA on record as additional material in the above Writ
Petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.M R K CHAKRAVARTHY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.CHAUDHARY AND CHAUDHARY ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS
LAW FIRM
2.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
3.
The Court made the following ORDER:
The land owners, whose lands have come under acquisition for
construction of a four-lane access-controlled Greenfield Highway by National
Highway Authority of India (NHAI) from Khammam-Devarapalli are before this
Court.
2025:APHC:22777
10
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel
appearing for the respondents.
3. The present petition is filed challenging the Notifications, Award
Enquiry Notices, Award, Award Notices issued under the National Highways
Act, 1956, EIA Notification, 2006 viz., (i) SO.No. 1388 (E) published in
Gazette No.1240 dated 27.04.2020 and under section 3A of the NH Act,
1956 published in Hans India, Andhra Jyothi daily News Papers dated
08.05.2020 (ii) S.O.No.4189(E), MORT & H dated 23.11.2020 published in
Gazette No.3687 under section 3D of the NH Act, (iii) Public Notice
Rc.No.1/2020/CALA&JC/NHAI/365BG, dated 08.08.2020 under section
3(G)(3) of the NH Act; (iv) Award Enquiry Notices vide ROC No.1/NH-365
BG/2020 dated 20.01.2020 and 23.01.2021; (v) Award Nos.6/2021/NH365BG, 7/2021/NH-365 BG, dated 15.03.2021 of the 6th Respondent under
section 23 of RFCTLRR Act r/w section 3G of the NH Act; (vi) Award Notices
issued vide Roc.No.01/2020/NH-365 BG dated 17.07.2021 under section
3H(2) of the NH Act, 1956 and section 26 of RFCTLRR Act; (vii) Proceedings
in File No.10-51/2020-IA.III, dated 23.12.2021.
4. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioners
are the owners of the lands in Rajavaram, Iduvadalapalem, Kannayagudem
Villages, Koyyalagudem Mandal of West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.
2025:APHC:22777
11
The said revenue lands were sought to be acquired for public purpose of
constructing Khammam-Devarapalli four-lane access-controlled Greenfield
Highway by Respondents (NHAI).
It is the case of the Petitioners that they have paid conversion tax as
regulated under Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Land (Conversion for NonAgricultural Purposes) Act, 2006 (APLA Act) and that the same has been
intimated to Revenue Divisional Officer. The Petitioners contend that the land
stood converted on payment of conversion tax by the date of Sec.3A
Notification by virtue of Section 3 of APLA Act. However, W.P.No.1377 of
2019 pertaining to conversion of the said lands to non-agricultural lands is
pending before this Hon‟ble Court.
It is also contented by the Petitioners that initially in the year 2018, the
Respondents have issued Notification and Awards similar to the impugned
Proceedings and on receiving objections dated 05.11.2018 from the
Petitioners that the alleged road is not a National Highway published under
NH Act and therefore the provisions of NH Act cannot be invoked, the
Respondent authorities dropped the acquisition proceedings and that after a
lapse of two years, fresh notifications have been issued which are impugned
in the case on hand.
2025:APHC:22777
12
It is vehemently contended by the learned counsel for Petitioners that
there is no declaration by the Union of India (1st Respondent) in the Gazette
that the proposed road is a National Highway as mandated under Section
2(2) of the NH Act and therefore the NH Act does not apply and that the
entire impugned Proceedings of acquisition, Notification and Awards are ultra
vires liable to be set aside. It is also argued by the learned counsel for
Petitioners that it is nothing but colourable exercise of power just to escape
the rigors of RFCTLRR Act.
The learned counsel for Petitioners further stated that the Petitioners
have raised objections under Section 3C dated 15.05.2020 and that they
have also filed claim statements in the office of the Competent Authority,
Land Acquisition (6th Respondent) dated 27.01.2021 and 28.01.2021 under
Section 21(2) of RFCTLRR Act and that the Land Acquisition Officer passed
the Award without conducting any enquiry.
It was also submitted by the learned counsel for Petitioners that it was
surprising that the copy of the Award No.7/2021/NH 365BG dt:__.03.3021
was not furnished to the Petitioners and that they had to file the present
petition without annexing the copy of the same. It is also the case of the
Petitioners that notice dated 20.01.2021 under Section 3G(3) of the NH Act is
not in conformity with the RFCTLRR Act. It is also their case that the
2025:APHC:22777
13
Respondents have not taken into consideration the prevailing market values
despite objection being raised and that the lands are non-agricultural lands
and the value should have been determined basing on the prevailing market
value of non-agricultural lands as the lands have been converted to nonagricultural lands prior to the impugned Notification issued vide Gazette
No.1240 dated 27.04.2020 in S.O.No.1388(E) dated 27.04.2020 under
Section 3A(1) of the NH Act, 1956.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his contentions
relied upon the following decisions:
i) Project Director, Project Implementation Unit v. P.V. Krishnamoorthy
& Ors 1
.
ii) J&K Housing Board and another v. Kunwar Sanjay Krishan Kaul and
others2
.
--- To reiterate that statutory provision provides a particular manner for
doing a particular act, the said thing or act must be done in the manner
prescribed.
iii) Bhimavarapu Giridhar Kumar Reddy v. Union Government3
.
1
(2021) 3 SCC 572
2
(2011) 10 SCC 714
3
(2012) SCC Online AP 148
2025:APHC:22777
14
iv) Competent Authority v. Barangore Jute Factory and others
4
.
--- Held in the absence of plan, it is difficult to raise objections under
section 3(c)(1).
v) Hindustan Petroleum v. Darius Shapur Chennai and others5
.
--- Section 3(c)(2) casts a duty on the competent authority to consider
the objections after hearing the objections and making further enquiry shall
allow or disallow the objections and competent authority must give reasons
that the objections raised by the petitioners were dealt by assigning reasons.
But the Competent authority has not applied its mind and the objections were
not dealt with objectively by the competent authority.
6. On the other hand, the learned Senior Counsel Mr. Chidambaram for
the Respondents submitted that the National Highways Authority of India
(NHAI) has taken up construction of four lane access controlled Green Field
Highway Project from Khammam-Devarapalli section measuring 162.126 km
in length declared as NH 365BG (erstwhile 365-BB) and the National
Highway Authority of India has decided to construct the KhammamDevarapalli connecting Telangana & Andhra Pradesh states under Inter
Corridor route under Bharathmala Pariyojana as per the directions of the
4
(2005) 13 SCC 477
5
2005 (7) SCC 627
2025:APHC:22777
15
Hon‟ble Prime Minister during Pragathi Meeting held on 23.05.2018 and the
minutes are as follows:
(i) Ministry of Road Transport & Highways should complete survey as per
revised alignment and accordingly, submit the revised Land Acquisition
proposals to Government of Telangana by September, 2018.
(ii) Ministry of Road Transport & Highways in co-ordination with State
Government should resolve all the issues hindering the project and start the
construction work.
The learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the
said project has been taken up as a part of green field project as it reduced
the distance between Rajahmundry and Hyderabad by 56km and between
Khammam to Devarapalli by 24 km and creates substantial gains in terms of
vehicle operating cost, reduced travel time and that it is set to boost
economic development of the adjoining areas and that it is considered as
“high priority” as it improves connectivity between the two states of
Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and also aims to decongest NH 65 and NH
16. The counsel for the Respondents also stated that in pursuance of the
same the DPR work was transferred to NHAI via a tripartite agreement and
that the subject work is included in PRAGATI review and the alignment was
reviewed by the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways in 3rd
2025:APHC:22777
16
week of May, 2018 and that the green field alignment from Khammam to
Devarapalli was given a go ahead by the Hon‟ble Prime Minister in the
meeting held on 23.05.2018.
The learned Senior counsel for the Respondents submitted that the
Joint Collector (A&W) Eluru, was designated as Competent Authority for Land
Acquisition for this project vide Orders 3672(E), dated 25.07.2018. Ministry of
Road Transport and Highways Department has issued Notification in S.O.No.
1388(E) dt:27.04.2020 under Section 3A of NH Act, 1956 for acquisition of
land for formation of NH-365 BG. It is argued by the learned counsel for the
Respondents that the Competent Authority Land Acquisition („CALA‟ for
short) had provided an opportunity of hearing to the land owners and that
infact, the Petitioners attended the enquiry on 04.09.2020 and gave a joint
statement before the authority. Subsequent to the enquiry, the CALA
disallowed the objection vide order dt: 07.09.2020 under section 3C as the
lands are being acquired for public purpose. The learned counsel also refuted
the material allegation made by the Petitioners regarding Section 3C
objections enquiry. It is pertinent to note that the Petitioners and 11 others
have filed Section 3C objections on a Section 3A Notification dt: 27.04.2020.
It is also the case of the Respondents that after verification of an extent
of 73,366 sq.mts in Kannaigudem village of Koyyalagudem Mandal,
2025:APHC:22777
17
Notification u/s 3D(1) and 3D(2) of NH Act has been proposed for approval of
length through the Project Director, NHAI, PIU, Rajahmundry and the
Government of India in exercise of its powers conferred under the said
section vide its Notification S.O.4189(E) dated 23.11.2020 declared that the
lands specified in the schedule acquired for the purpose and in pursuance of
Section 3D(2) shall vest absolutely with the Central Government free from all
encumbrances. Notification with respect to the same has been published in
E.O. issue Part II Section 3 of sub-section (ii) of the Gazette of India Issue
No. 3687, dt: 23.11.2020.
The learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents argued that Section
3G Notification was published in one Telugu daily News paper and two
English News papers on 20.01.2021 appraising the land owners/interested
persons to attend award enquiry along with title documents in support of their
claims on 27.01.2021. Subsequently the competent authority conducted the
said enquiry and passed an Award in respect of the lands as per the
provisions of the NH Act, 1956 and section 26 of RFCTLRR Act, 2013.
The learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents refuted the
contention of the Petitioners that the initial Notification issued vide S.O.
No.5130(E), dt: 28.09.2018 was for the entire stretch covered under 31
villages including that of the Petitioners and that the said Notification was
2025:APHC:22777
18
issued for 70 m width and that out of 31 villages survey was conducted in 24
villages and Section 3D Notification was also published vide S.O. No.156(E),
dt: 09.01.2019 Gazette No.142, dt: 10.01.2019. Since the Petitioners did not
extend their support for survey the same was lapsed and fresh notification
had to be published under Section 3A for an extent of 60m width vide
S.O.No.1388(E), dt: 27.04.2020 Gazette Notification No.1240(E), dt:
27.04.2020 published in Telugu and English Dailies dt: 08.05.2020 calling for
objections under Section 3C. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that as
per Section 3G(3) of NH Act, 1956 public notice has been issued on
20.01.2021 inviting the landowners /interested persons to file their claims for
the land proposed for acquisition to establish their title over the land before
the competent authority on 27.01.2021 and the said notice was issued in
Telugu and English News Papers on 20.01.2021.
It is also the case of the Respondents that the compensation was
determined in terms of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and coming to the question of
multiplication factor the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Dept.,
Government of India in its Circular No.NH 11011/30-2015-LA dt: 08.08.2016
clarified that the multiplication factor of 2 which is used in calculation of
determining compensation is notified vide Gazette Notification S.O.425(E) dt:
09.02.2016 is applicable to the land acquired under RFCTLARR and in the
2025:APHC:22777
19
case of appropriate government defined under Section 3(e)(ii) and 3(e)(v) of
the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 with effect from 01.01.2015. As per the orders of
the NHAI authorities and Government of Andhra Pradesh multiplication factor
was calculated at 1.25 and the award was passed accordingly.
The learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents argued that the
contention of the Petitioners that there is no notification of declaration under
Section 2(2) of NH Act is incorrect and baseless as the Gazette has been
published vide S.O.2163E dt: 30.06.2020 declaring the New National
Highway number as NH-365BG for Greenfield. It is also stated that the sale
transactions of previous three years to the date of issuance of Section 3A
notification were taken into consideration and the market value was
determined in accordance with Section 26 of RFCTLAAR Act, 2013. It is also
vehemently submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent that
at every stage notices were issued and due procedure was followed from
time to time.
The learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents further argued that
the Petitioners can file an application before the Arbitrator cum District
Collector, appointed by the Central Government as per Section 3(G)(5) of NH
Act, 1956, if the compensation award is felt to be inadequate. It is also
submitted that the project work is entrusted to Rajamahendravaram
2025:APHC:22777
20
Greenfield Pvt. Ltd. vide Letter of Award dt: 15.09.2021 and that the
Agreement was concluded on 27.01.2021. It is also argued that the project is
a time bound project and any delay would cause an irreparable loss to the
Authority in the form of penalties, escalation of project cost and ultimately to
the public interest. It is also argued that the writ petition was filed with mala
fide intention to stall the ongoing road widening/construction project which is
undertaken in the interest of public at large and for overall growth and
strengthening of economy of our country.
7. The learned Senior Counsel, in support of his contentions relied upon
the following decisions:
i) Landowners of Village Suthsoo and others v. State of J&K and
others6
, wherein it was observed that for issuance of notification under
section 3A declaration that a particular stretch of road as a National Highway
is not a prerequisite.
ii) Pahwa Plastics Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Dastak NGO and other7
.
iii) Electrosheets Ltd. v. Union of India and another8
and
6
2023 SCC Online J&K 247
7
(2022) SCC Online SC 362
8
2021 SCC Online SC 1247
2025:APHC:22777
21
iv) Project Director, Project Implementation Unit v. P.V. Krishnamoorthy
& Ors, wherein it was observed that environmental clearance is required
before the actual commencement of the work but not necessary at the time of
notification.
8. Having heard the counsels for both the Petitioners and the
Respondents at length and having considered the material on record, this
Court is of the view that the issues raised by the Petitioners can be broadly
classified into two. The primary question that needs to be answered is
whether the project in the impugned proceedings is a national highway
project or not and whether the provisions under sections 3A to I would be
applicable.
The second category of questions pertain to procedure followed in
awarding of compensation, non-consideration of material produced, lack of
opportunity of being heard and multiplication factor.
9. In so far as the first question is concerned, this Court is of the view
that, the project Bharathmala Pariyojana has been conceived with an
intention to optimize the efficiency of freight and passenger movement across
the country by bridging critical infrastructural gaps through effective
interventions like development of Inter Corridors, green field highways etc. As
part of this initiative, the government has taken up this green field project to
2025:APHC:22777
22
reduce the distance between Rajahmundry and Hyderabad by 56 km and
between Khammam to Devarapalli by 24 km and create substantial gains in
terms of vehicle operating cost, reduced travel time and boost the economic
development of the adjoining areas.
10. National Highways Authority has been constituted under the National
Highways Authority of India Act, 1956 with an object to develop, maintain and
manage the National Highways in the country. As has been reiterated by the
law courts, the NH Act, 1956 is a complete code in itself. It is trite to say that
the impediment should not be created in the matter of National Highways
which provides the much-needed transportation infrastructure.
11. Section 2 of the National Highways Act, 1956 reads as under:
2. Declaration of certain highways to be national highways.—(1) Each
of the highways specified in the Schedule2*** is hereby declared to be a
national highway.
(2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
declare any other highway to be a national highway and on the
publication of such notification such highway shall be deemed to be
specified in the Schedule.
(3) The Central Government may, by like notification, omit any highway
from the Schedule and on the publication of such notification, the
highway so omitted shall cease to be a national highway.
(emphasis supplied)
12. Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 inserted by the
amendment of 1997, empowers the Central Government to declare its
2025:APHC:22777
23
intention to acquire “any land”. The vital condition for exercise of such power
conferred on the Central Government is that it should be satisfied that such
land is required for public purpose of building a national highway or a part
thereof. Section 3B of the Act empowers the person authorized by the central
government to enter upon the notified lands for the limited purpose of survey,
etc. to ascertain its suitability for acquisition for the stated purpose. Section
3C gives an opportunity to any person interested in the land to raise
objections if any on the notified land. The final declaration is issued under
section 3D after hearing all persons who raised objections. Subsequent to
such declaration /notification under section 3D the land vests with the central
government free from all encumbrances and possession is taken under
section 3E upon depositing the compensation amount in the manner
prescribed as per section 3H and as determined under section 3G.
13. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Project Director, Project Implementation
Unit v. P.V. Krishnamoorthy & Ors. opined that for issuance of notification
under section 3A, declaration/notification of a particular stretch of road as
national highway is not a condition precedent. Relying on the said decision by
the Hon‟ble Apex Court, the Division Bench of Hon‟ble High Court of Jammu
& Kashmir and Ladakh in Landowners of Village Suthsoo & Ors. v. State
of J&K and Ors. held as follows:
2025:APHC:22777
24
23. It is, thus, evident that, for issuance of notification under section
3A, declaration/notification of a particular stretch of road as national
highway is not a condition precedent. The Government is
competent and is empowered under section 3A to issue notification
in the official gazette declaring its intention to acquire land for the
building of a national highway. It is common knowledge and is well
spelt out by the provisions of National Highways Act, that what is
notified as a national highway under section 2 is an existing
highway. Section 2 deals with declaring certain existing highways to
be national highways. Thus, from a reading of section 3A along with
section 2, it would become abundantly clear that for issuing a
notification under section 3A by the central government, advance
declaration of a highway, yet to be constructed, as national highway
is not sine qua non. Such declaration presupposes existence of a
highway.”
14. It is, therefore, evident that for issuance of notification under section
3A, notification under section 2(2) is not a condition precedent. The
government is empowered under section 3A to issue a Gazette notification
declaring its intention to acquire land for building a national highway. It is
reiterated that what is declared as national highway under section 2(2) is
an existing highway. Juxtaposing section 3A and section 2 of the NH Act,
1956 it is amply clear that to issue a notification under section 3A prior
declaration under section 2(2) is not an essential condition. Therefore, the
contention of the Petitioners that this is not a national highway and that it
2025:APHC:22777
25
would not come under the purview of National Highways Act holds no
water.
15. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Ramniklal N. Bhutta & Anr. v. State of
Maharashtra9
observed as follows:
Before parting with this case, we think it necessary to make a few
observations relevant to land acquisition proceedings. Our country is now
launched upon an ambitious programme of all-round economic
advancement to make our economy competitive in the world market. We
are anxious to attract foreign direct investment to the maximum extent.
We propose to compete with China economically. We wish to attain the
pace of progress achieved by some of the Asian countries, referred to as
“Asian tigers”, e.g., South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. It is, however,
recognised on all hands that the infrastructure necessary for sustaining
such a pace of progress is woefully lacking in our country. The means of
transportation, power and communications are in dire need of substantial
improvement, expansion and modernisation. These things very often call
for acquisition of land and that too without any delay. It is, however,
natural that in most of these cases, the persons affected challenge the
acquisition proceedings in courts. These challenges are generally in the
shape of writ petitions filed in High Courts. Invariably, stay of acquisition
is asked for and in some cases, orders by way of stay or injunction are
also made. Whatever may have been the practices in the past, a time
has come where the courts should keep the larger public interest in mind
while exercising their power of granting stay/injunction. The power under
Article 226 is discretionary. It will be exercised only in furtherance of
interests of justice and not merely on the making out of a legal point. And
9
(1997)1SCC134
2025:APHC:22777
26
in the matter of land acquisition for public purposes, the interests of
justice and the public interest coalesce. They are very often one and the
same. Even in a civil suit, granting of injunction or other similar orders,
more particularly of an interlocutory nature, is equally discretionary. The
courts have to weigh the public interest vis-à-vis the private interest while
exercising the power under Article 226 — indeed any of their
discretionary powers. It may even be open to the High Court to direct, in
case it finds finally that the acquisition was vitiated on account of noncompliance with some legal requirement that the persons interested shall
also be entitled to a particular amount of damages to be awarded as a
lump sum or calculated at a certain percentage of compensation payable.
There are many ways of affording appropriate relief and redressing a
wrong; quashing the acquisition proceedings is not the only mode of
redress. To wit, it is ultimately a matter of balancing the competing
interests. Beyond this, it is neither possible nor advisable to say. We
hope and trust that these considerations will be duly borne in mind by the
courts while dealing with challenges to acquisition proceedings.
(emphasis supplied)
16. In another case of Union of India v. Kushala Shetty & Ors.10 the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court held as under:
“Here, it is apposite to mention 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
10 (2011) 12 SCC 69
2025:APHC:22777
27
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 sub serve the larger
public interest. In such matters, the scope of judicial review is very
limited.
(emphasis supplied)
17. The Division Bench of the Hon‟ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in
Manjit Singh & Ors v. Union of India & Ors.11 held that, “this Court is also
sanguine of the fact that where larger interest of public is involved, sanctity of
date of completion of the project for construction and relevance or importance
cannot be ignored on account of few numbered litigants, who are contesting
for the sake of determination of appropriate compensation. The aspect of
public interest over private rights assumes significance.”
18. From the above discussion, it is abundantly clear that the writ courts
have limited scope of judicial review in matters involving technical expertise
and the law courts have time and again reiterated the fact that public interest
11 MANU/PH/0150/2022
2025:APHC:22777
28
assumes greater significance over private interest and that the Courts must
consider this while exercising discretionary powers under the writ jurisdiction.
19. In the light of the above discussion, this court is of the view that nobody
can dispute that the project is of national importance involving huge public
money and stalling the project any further would not only be against public
interest but also against the interest of the nation. It is to be borne in mind
that “national interest > public interest > private / individual interest”. Thus,
considering all the facts and circumstances and considering various case
laws as mentioned supra, I am of the view that the impugned proceedings
under sec 3A does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and consequently
the declaration under section 3D is also validly made. It is therefore observed
that no useful purpose would be served by quashing the impugned
proceedings, hence, the prayer of the Petitioners to quash the same is
rejected.
20. Having said this, the Petitioners are at liberty to raise the grievances
pertaining to non-consideration of material by the Competent Authority;
quantum of compensation and the other allied issues like multiplication factor
before the appropriate alternate authority as provided under Section 3G(5) of
the National Highways Act, 1956.
2025:APHC:22777
29
21. The Respondent authorities are expected to complete the project as
expeditiously as possible without prejudice to the rights of the Petitioners to
claim suitable compensation before the appropriate authority.
22. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as
to costs.
The interim order, if any, deemed to have been vacated. Pending
interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
__________________________
JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN
20-06-2025
Note : LR to be marked
B/O
PND
2025:APHC:22777
