ADVOCATEMMMOHAN: Constitution of India — Article 226 — Writ of Mandamus — National Highways Act, 1956 — Acquisition of land for National Highway — Due process — Objections under Section 3-A — Possession prior to completion of acquisition — Impermissibility. National Highways Act, 1956 — Sections 3-A and 3-D — Mandatory procedure — Acquisition not complete — Possession cannot be taken without following statutory procedure and payment of compensation. Held: Where acquiring authority undertakes before Court to adhere to statutory procedure under the National Highways Act, 1956, writ petition disposed directing adherence to due process while taking possession. (Paras 4 & 5)

Sunday, December 14, 2025

Constitution of India — Article 226 — Writ of Mandamus — National Highways Act, 1956 — Acquisition of land for National Highway — Due process — Objections under Section 3-A — Possession prior to completion of acquisition — Impermissibility. National Highways Act, 1956 — Sections 3-A and 3-D — Mandatory procedure — Acquisition not complete — Possession cannot be taken without following statutory procedure and payment of compensation. Held: Where acquiring authority undertakes before Court to adhere to statutory procedure under the National Highways Act, 1956, writ petition disposed directing adherence to due process while taking possession. (Paras 4 & 5)

advocatemmmohan

Constitution of India — Article 226 — Writ of Mandamus — National Highways Act, 1956 — Acquisition of land for National Highway — Due process — Objections under Section 3-A — Possession prior to completion of acquisition — Impermissibility.

National Highways Act, 1956 — Sections 3-A and 3-D — Mandatory procedure — Acquisition not complete — Possession cannot be taken without following statutory procedure and payment of compensation.

Held:
Where acquiring authority undertakes before Court to adhere to statutory procedure under the National Highways Act, 1956, writ petition disposed directing adherence to due process while taking possession.
(Paras 4 & 5)

FACTS (As emerging from the Judgment)

The petitioners claimed ownership over land admeasuring Ac.1-85 cents in Sy.No.2 of Venkappakota Village, Madanapalle Mandal, Annamayya District, which was sought to be utilised for laying National Highway No.71. (Para 3)
According to the petitioners, the respondent-authorities proceeded with construction activities without following due process of law and in violation of principles of natural justice, despite the petitioners’ representation dated 19-10-2024 pending before the District Collector. (Relief portion; Para 3)
It was contended that a Section 3-A notification dated 03-01-2025 under the National Highways Act, 1956 had been issued, granting time to file objections, yet the authorities allegedly proceeded high-handedly. (Relief portion)
The petitioners asserted that objections were earlier submitted on 08-04-2022 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, but were not duly considered. (Para 3)

RELIEF SOUGHT

The petitioners sought a declaration that the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in laying NH-71 in Sy.No.2 without following due process was illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional, and for a consequential direction restraining the respondents from proceeding with construction without adhering to the National Highways Act, 1956 and principles of natural justice.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES

Petitioners

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the authorities proceeded with acquisition and construction without adhering to the mandatory procedure under the National Highways Act, 1956 and without properly considering the petitioners’ objections. (Para 3)

Respondents (NHAI)

The learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 produced written instructions dated 22-01-2025, stating inter alia that:

NHAI never interfered with the petitioners’ land.
No construction was undertaken in the petitioners’ land.
Acquisition was yet to be completed.
Petitioners were at liberty to submit objections pursuant to the Section 3-A(1) notification published on 08-01-2025.
NHAI had no intention to interfere with the land until acquisition is completed, award passed, and compensation deposited with the CALA. (Para 4)

ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION

Whether the respondents could take possession or interfere with the petitioners’ land for laying NH-71 without completing acquisition proceedings and without following the due process under the National Highways Act, 1956.

ANALYSIS & REASONING OF THE COURT

The Court considered the submissions of both sides and examined the written instructions dated 22-01-2025 furnished by respondent Nos.2 and 3. (Para 4)
The Court recorded that the respondents categorically committed to adhere to the mandatory procedures under the National Highways Act, 1956. (Para 5)
In view of such commitment and the statutory scheme governing acquisition, the Court held that the respondents are required to follow due process before taking possession of the petitioners’ property. (Para 5)
Considering the above, the Court found it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to act strictly in accordance with the procedure outlined in their written instructions. (Para 5)

FINAL ORDER / DIRECTIONS

The writ petition was disposed of.
The respondents were directed to follow the due process as outlined in the written instructions dated 22-01-2025, while taking possession of the petitioners’ property. (Para 5)
No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, were ordered to stand closed. (Para 6)

RATIO DECIDENDI

Possession of land for National Highway purposes cannot be taken unless the acquiring authority strictly adheres to the mandatory procedure under the National Highways Act, 1956; where the authority undertakes before Court to follow such procedure, appropriate directions can be issued and the writ petition disposed of.

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN