Allahabad High Court
RAJAN LALversusPROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the NHAI to decide the pending representation within three months, after hearing all stakeholders.
Summary
Petitioner Rajan Lal filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) to consider his representation dated 27 May 2025 and refer the dispute to the Principal Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956. The petitioner limited his relief to the disposal of that pending representation. The respondents raised no objection to the prayer. The Court, noting that keeping the petition pending would serve no useful purpose, disposed of the petition with the parties' consent, directing the NHAI to decide the representation within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order, after giving a hearing to all stakeholders. No notice was required to a third respondent, Amit Kumar. The order was dated 14 May 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing NHAI to consider and decide a representation under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956
- Whether the petition should be dismissed or disposed of without further hearing
Legislation cited
- National Highway Act, 1956 — s. 3H(4)
Subjects
- mandamus
- representation
- land acquisition
- NHAI
- National Highway Act
- administrative law
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 19004 of 2026
Rajan Lal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Project Director, National Highway Authority And
2 Others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mohd. Abrar Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Abu Bakht, C.S.C., Dinesh Kumar
Singh
Court No. - 21
HON'BLE MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J.
HON'BLE KUNAL RAVI SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. Uttara Bahuguna, learned
Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondent and Sri
Dinesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 1.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed today, no notice is required
to be issued to respondent no. 3 i.e. Amit Kumar.
3. The instant writ petition is preferred, inter alia for the following relief:
"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding
the Competent Authority (Land Acquisition NHAI) Kaushambi/
Respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representation dated
27.05.2025 and refer the dispute to Principal Civil Court under section
3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956."
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his relief
only to the extent of disposal of petitioner's application dated 27.05.2025,
which is pending before the respondent no. 2.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection to the prayer so
made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that no
useful purpose would be served keeping the petition pending
consideration, accordingly, without adverting to the merits of the case and
WRIC No. 19004 of 2026
2
with the consent of the parties, we dispose of the instant writ petition with
the observation that in case the representation dated 27.05.2025 has not
been decided till date, the respondent no. 2 must take a final decision in
the matter, but certainly after giving ample opportunity of hearing to the
all the stake holders, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three
months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
(Kunal Ravi Singh,J.) (Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
May 14, 2026
Pkb/
Digitally signed by :-
PRAMOD KUMAR BAJPAI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…