NAINITAL, India, March 12 -- Uttarakhand High Court issued the following judgment/order on Feb. 10:

1. For the reasons stated in the delay condonation application duly supported with an affidavit, the delay condonation application is allowed and the delay of 07 days in filing the instant intra-court appeal is condoned.

Special Appeal No.320 of 2023

2. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 18.07.2023 in Writ Petition (M/S) No.2000 of 2023, whereby the writ court has declined to interfere with an order dated 29.10.2022, passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Haridwar in Case No.144/ VIII-S.L.A.O. (2021-22), arising out of the rival claim of compensation under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956. The writ court has observed that the claim of the appellants to the 1/3rd amount of compensation in the amount awarded, is a question which is to be decided by the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), and accordingly, while granting liberty to the appellants to avail the said remedy, the writ petition has been dismissed.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants were having 1/3rd share in the acquired land and were, therefore, entitled to 1/3rd of the compensation awarded. The appellants raised the said issue before the Competent Authority and the Competent Authority without having regard to the fact that there was serious dispute of title between the parties, has illegally proceeded to examine the dispute itself, though, it should have been referred to the Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the Act.

4. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents submits that the present intra-court appeal would not be maintainable under the Rules of Court, as the writ petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that the appellants have already availed the remedy of filing declaratory Suit under Section 229-B of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, and therefore, the appellants, in any event, have to await the decision in the said Suit and based on the decision in the said proceedings, the claim for compensation could be made.

5. Undisputedly, the writ petition was directed against the order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956. It was not an order passed by any Court, and therefore, we are of the opinion that even if the writ petition was labeled as writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, but it was essentially filed invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, and therefore, the preliminary objection is, hereby, overruled.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=tuqye3PhFs%2BBDn75ghiOpAIKD%2FwJ%2FWGyzzYbZf%2Bl3OaH8h8uId%2B1bhDhcwGI0FRd&caseno=SPA/320/2023&cCode=1&cino=UKHC010139112023&state_code=15&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.