DURVIJAY SING AND 3 OTHERSversusSIDDARTH KUMAR SINGH, PROJECT DIRECTOR AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
           CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6473 of 2025

Durvijay Sing And 3 Others
                                                                   .....Applicant(s)
                                      Versus

Siddarth Kumar Singh, Project Director And
Another                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                             Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Om Prakash, Shyam Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)              :   Arun Kumar

Court No. - 9
                  HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. The writ Court on 21.10.2024 while disposing of Writ-C No. 33340 of
2024 passed the following order:-

     "1. The case of the petitioners is that their land was acquired by NHAI
     under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 and an award
     was also made. The petitioners have received compensation but the
     rehabilitation and resettlement award has not been made as per the
     Second Schedule to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
     Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. It has,
     therefore, been prayed that the respondents be directed to make
     rehabilitation and resettlement award as per provisions of the Act, 2013.
     2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the claim of the
     petitioners is similar to the one raised in Writ C No. 2782 of 2023 (Ashok
     Kumar and 8 others vs. National Highway Authority of India and 3
     others), which was disposed of by this Court, by order dated 24.2.2023 in
     terms of the order passed in Writ C No. 21601 of 2022 (Ranvir Singh and
     35 others vs. National Highway Authority of India and Competent
     Authority For Land Acquisition and Others). The operative part of the
     order passed in Writ C No.2782 of 2023 (Ashok Kumar and 8 others vs.
     National Highway Authority of India and 3 others), dated 24.2.2023 is as
     follows :-
     "9. Lastly the writ petitions have been disposed of with the following
     directions:-
     "For the above, without entering into the merits of the claim of the
                                                           CAPL No. 6473 of 2025
                                2


petitioner, it is directed that the competent authority under the National
Highways Act, 1956 shall prepare a proposal for the rehabilitation and
resettlement award for affected families, within the meaning of Section
3(c) of the Act, 2013, in terms of the entitlements provided in the Second
Schedule, with the assistance of the officers of the NHAI and submit the
same before the Collector for making award in accordance with the
provisions of Section 31 of the RECTLARR Act, 2013.
For preparation of the said proposal, the competent authority shall make
necessary enquiry as per the provisions of the Sections 34, 35 and 36 of
the RECTLARR Act, 2013 as contained in Chapter V of the Act, 2013, i.e
before preparation of the rehabilitation and resettlement award, in
relation to the acquisition in question.
It goes without saying that the representatives of the National Highways
Authority and the affected tenure holders are entitled to participate in the
proceedings for preparation of the award. The claim of the petitioners
herein for the entitlements under the Second Schedule at serial no. (1) for
provision of housing unit in case of displacement; serial no. (4) choice of
annuity and employment and serial no. (10), one time resettlement
allowance, shall be specifically considered by the competent authority in
making such an award.
The entire exercise shall be completed, as expeditious as possible,
preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy
of this order.
We may make it clear that, at this stage, no direction has been given for
providing benefits of Third Schedule as no such demand has been raised
by the petitioners herein.
In any case, while making such an award, independent consideration
shall be given to the elements of rehabilitation and resettlement
entitlements for the affected families provided in the Second Schedule,
without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove."
10. The petitioners herein are similarly situated and, therefore, are
entitled for the same relief.
11. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of."
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the instant petition be
also disposed of in same terms.
4. Shri Anurag Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of N.H.A.I.
                                                            CAPL No. 6473 of 2025
                                  3


and Shri Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the Union of India,
do not dispute that the claim of the petitioners is identical, however, they
submit that in the matters arising out of acquisition made under the
provisions of National Highways Act, 1956, it is the Competent Authority
notified by the Central Government, who is competent to declare the
award and not the Collector of the district concerned and they submit that
this aspect may be clarified by this Court.
5. This Court, recently, while deciding Writ C No. 13489 of 2024 (Rampal
Singh and 12 others vs National Highway Authority of India and 2 others)
by order dated 24.04.2024, considered identical submission made on
behalf of N.H.A.I. and observed as under:
"6. Section 23 read with Section 31 of the Act, 2013 empowers the
Collector to pass rehabilitation and resettlement award for each affected
family in terms of the entitlements provided in the second schedule. Under
Section 3(g) of the Act, 2013 the Collector has been defined thus:-
"(g) Collector means the Collector of a revenue district, and includes a
Deputy Commissioner and any officer specially designated by the
appropriate Government to perform the functions of a Collector under
this Act;"
7. It is evident from the definition of Collector that it includes any Officer
specially designated by the appropriate Government to perform the
functions of the Collector under the said Act.
8. In NH Act, the power to declare award is conferred upon the competent
authority under Section 3G. The competent authority has been defined
under Section 3(a) of the Act of 1956 as follows:-
"(a) "competent authority" means any person or authority authorised by
the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, to
perform the functions of the competent authority for such area as may be
specified in the notification;"
9. It is not disputed that the Central Government had issued notification
on 28.08.2015 under Section 105(3) of the Act, 2013 directing that the
provisions relating to the second and third schedule shall apply to all
cases of land acquisitions under the enactments specified in the fourth
schedule to the said Act. The effect of said notification is to extend the
beneficial provisions of the Act, 2013 to the acquisitions made under the
NH Act. However, the machinery provided for holding enquiry and
                                                                                                     CAPL No. 6473 of 2025
                                                                         4


                                           determining compensation does not get altered. The same is still to be
                                           done in the manner and by the authority stipulated under the Statutes
                                           under which acquisition was done. We, therefore, find force in the
                                           submission of learned counsel for NHAI that in matters relating to
                                           acquisitions under NH Act, it would be the competent authority, as
                                           defined under Section 3(a) of NH Act, which would be empowered to
                                           examine the claims pertaining to rehabilitation and resettlement and
                                           make award accordingly and not the Collector of the district."
                                           6. In view of above, the instant petition stands disposed of with direction
                                           to the Competent Authority under National Highways Act, 1956 to
                                           proceed with the exercise of examining the claims pertaining to
                                           rehabilitation and resettlement and take decision on the said aspect
                                           having regard to the provisions of Chapter V of the Act, 2013 within
                                           twelve weeks from the date of communication of the instant order. "

                                    2. Today, compliance affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party
                                    nos. 1 and 2, which are taken on record.

                                    3. According to learned Standing Counsel, the decision has been taken in
                                    regard to claim of the applicant on 20.01.2026, copy of which has been
                                    appended as annexure-1 to compliance affidavit.

                                    3. In view of said fact, as the order of writ Court has been complied with,
                                    the contempt application is rendered infructuous and stands dismissed.

                                    4. Contempt notice stands discharged.


                                                                                           (Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
                                    February 6, 2026
                                    (V.S.SINGH)




Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad