JHALLU LAL @ JHALLUversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                         WRIT - C No. - 17925 of 2025

Jhallu Lal @ Jhallu
                                                               .....Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

Union Of India And 2 Others
                                                             .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)        : Ravi Prakash Gautam, Vikas Pal,
                                   Vinod Kumar Maurya
Counsel for Respondent(s)        : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Mahendra Pratap,
                                   Rajesh Kumar Jaiswal, Vaibhav
                                   Tripathi

Court No. - 21
            HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
            HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Devesh Vikram, learned
Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no. 3 and Shri
Vaibhav Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

2. The case of the petitioner is that her land was acquired by NHAI and an
award was also made. The petitioner has 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.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner
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
                                                         WRIC No. 17925 of 2025
                               2


directions:-

"For the above, without entering into the merits of the claim of the
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."
                                                                WRIC No. 17925 of 2025
                                     3


     10. The petitioners herein are similarly situated and, therefore, are
     entitled for the same relief.

     11. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of."

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the instant petition be also
disposed of in same terms.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of N.H.A.I. and learned Additional
Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents do not dispute
that the claim of the petitioner 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.

6. 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:-
                                                                                                    WRIC No. 17925 of 2025
                                                                              4


                                            "(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
                                            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."

                                    7. 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 declare award on the said aspect having regard to the
                                    provisions of Chapter V of the Act, 2013 within twelve weeks from the date
                                    of the communication of the instant order.



                                                            (Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
                                    January 27, 2026
                                    A.K.Srivastava




Digitally signed by :-
ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad