Case Note & Summary
The dispute concerned acquisition of land under the National Highways Act, 1956 for widening and four-laning of National Highway No. 17 (New NH 66) in North Goa. The petitioners, a private limited company and its executive director, owned a property admeasuring 320 square metres in Survey No. 73/1 of Pilerne, Bardez, Goa. The respondents included the Union of India through the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the National Highways Authority of India, the State of Goa, and the Chief Engineer, National Highways. The petitioners sought to quash the possession notice dated 24.11.2022 issued under Section 3E, the notification dated 02.06.2017 under Section 3A, the notification dated 25.05.2018 under Section 3D, and to obtain a declaration that the acquisition was illegal, null and void. The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways issued Notification dated 02.06.2017 under Section 3A declaring intent to acquire several properties for highway development from Karaswada to Porvorim and Panaji to Bambolim. Subsequently, Notification dated 25.05.2018 under Section 3D declared the acquisition. The Special Land Acquisition Officer issued a notice under Section 3E(3), to which the petitioners responded on 06.09.2018 objecting to the land acquisition and seeking deferment. In October 2018, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 1059 of 2018 challenging the Section 3C report and subsequent steps; a similar Writ Petition No. 1200 of 2018 was filed by Ashok Miguel Filipe Dias and 31 others. By order dated 13.03.2019, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at Goa disposed of both petitions, recording the statement of the learned Advocate General that the Section 3C report dated 17.05.2018 stood withdrawn, directing the Special Land Acquisition Officer to hear the petitioners and issue a fresh report under Section 3C, excluding time taken for notices under Sections 3A to 3D, and granting liberty to file fresh petitions. In the present Writ Petition No. 153 of 2023, the petitioners challenged the subsequent possession notice dated 24.11.2022 under Section 3E and the earlier notification under Section 3D. At the hearing, the petitioners' senior counsel fairly submitted that the challenge to the Notification dated 02.06.2017 under Section 3A was not being pressed at that stage, with liberty reserved to challenge it later. The Court made the rule returnable immediately and granted liberty as prayed. The extracted judgment text ends at paragraph 10, which reproduces the earlier order dated 13.03.2019; therefore, the final reasoning and operative directions on the remaining prayers, including the validity of the 24.11.2022 possession notice, are not available in the provided text.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - National Highways Act, 1956 - Section 3A - Challenge to Notification dated 02.06.2017 - Petitioners sought quashing of Section 3A notification concerning their property, but in Writ Petition No.153 of 2023, senior counsel submitted that the challenge was not being pressed at this stage and sought liberty to challenge later - Held that liberty was granted as prayed for, with the challenge not being adjudicated (Paras 3-4). B) Land Acquisition - National Highways Act, 1956 - Sections 3C, 3D - Effect of Withdrawal of Section 3C Report on Subsequent Notifications - In earlier Writ Petition Nos.1059 of 2018 and 1200 of 2018, petitioners argued that once the Section 3C report dated 17.05.2018 was withdrawn, subsequent notifications under Sections 3D and 3E would not survive - The Division Bench by order dated 13.03.2019 accepted this submission and directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer to hear petitioners and issue a fresh report under Section 3C, excluding time taken for notices under Sections 3A to 3D - Held that the report dated 17.05.2018 stood withdrawn and fresh report was to be issued (Paras 8-10). C) Land Acquisition - National Highways Act, 1956 - Section 3E - Possession Notice - Petitioners challenged notice dated 24.11.2022 under Section 3E for taking over possession of property admeasuring 320 square metres at Survey No.73/1, Pilerne, Bardez Goa, and sought declaration that entire acquisition was illegal and void - The notice was issued after the earlier order directing fresh Section 3C report - Final adjudication on this issue is not included in the extracted text (Paras 3, 7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the possession notice dated 24.11.2022 under Section 3E of the National Highways Act, 1956 is valid; whether the notification dated 25.05.2018 under Section 3D is valid after withdrawal of Section 3C report; whether the acquisition of the petitioners' property is illegal, null and void; whether challenge to Section 3A notification should be adjudicated at this stage
Final Decision
Rule made returnable immediately. The Court granted liberty to the petitioners to challenge the Notification dated 02.06.2017 under Section 3A at a later stage as prayed for. Final decision on the remaining prayers in the present petition is not included in the provided judgment extract.
Law Points
- Withdrawal of Section 3C report under National Highways Act
- 1956 may invalidate subsequent notifications under Sections 3D and 3E
- liberty to challenge Section 3A notification later
- necessity of fresh Section 3C report after hearing affected persons
- time taken for notices under Sections 3A to 3D excluded for fresh report
