Court dismisses petitioners' claim, directs compensation to rightful owner under National Highways Act
In a significant ruling, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, presided over by Justice Ms. Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, dismissed the petitions filed by Atiqa Begum and others challenging the release of compensation for land acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956. The petitioners, claiming rights through inheritance under Muslim Personal Law, sought intervention under Section 3H(4) of the Act, demanding the matter be referred to the civil court for adjudication.
The court's decision came after a thorough examination of the dispute surrounding the compensation for land acquired for the Baramulla-Kupwara National Highway project. The petitioners alleged that the mutation of the land solely in the name of Respondent No. 5, Mst. Sara Begum, was fraudulent, as it excluded their deceased mother, Mst. Malla Begum, from the inheritance.
Justice Kazmi emphasized that the petitioners had failed to establish a legally cognizable apportionment dispute as required under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act. The court noted that the revenue entries, which did not recognize the petitioners' claims, had stood unchallenged for over 70 years. This long-standing record, coupled with the absence of any declaratory decree in favor of the petitioners, led to the dismissal of their claim.
The judgment highlighted the importance of civil remedies to establish rights before invoking Section 3H(4). It was observed that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used as a substitute for civil litigation, especially in matters involving disputed titles.
The court directed the District Collector, Baramulla, to release the compensation to Respondent No. 5, subject to an undertaking for restitution should the petitioners succeed in their pending civil suit or revision petition. This decision upholds the primacy of established legal procedures in property disputes and reinforces the requirement for clear legal title in claims for compensation under the National Highways Act.
Bottom Line:
National Highways Act, 1956 - Competent Authority is not bound to refer a dispute under Section 3H(4) unless there exists a legally cognizable apportionment dispute or competing rights are prima facie established. Civil remedies must first be exhausted to determine title or right over the property before invoking Section 3H(4).
Statutory provision(s):
National Highways Act, 1956 Sections 3G, 3H(4); Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Atiqa Begum v. Union Territory of J&K, (Jammu And Kashmir)(Srinagar) : Law Finder Doc id # 2876770
