Court dismisses writ petitions challenging land acquisition for highway development, emphasizing public interest over private concerns.
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has dismissed writ petitions filed by Anant Mandgi challenging the land acquisition process for the formation of National Highway NH948A. The petitioner raised concerns about the issuance of Section 3D Notification under the National Highways Act, 1956, without obtaining prior environmental clearance and alleged non-consideration of objections raised during the acquisition process. However, the court emphasized that environmental clearance is mandatory only before the commencement of actual construction, not prior to the issuance of the 3D notification.
Justice Krishnan Ramasamy presided over the case, examining detailed submissions from both parties. The petitioner argued that the absence of environmental clearance violated the principles set forth in the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, and cited a Supreme Court judgment in the case of Project Director v. P.V. Krishnamurthy. Despite these claims, the court found that the procedures adhered to by the respondents were consistent with legal requirements and past judgments.
The court clarified that the issuance of the Section 3D Notification does not equate to the commencement of construction or preparation of land for the project. This process only marks the vesting of land with the government, post which the land would be entrusted to the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for development. The court underscored that environmental clearance must be obtained before any construction activities begin, reaffirming that the acquisition process can proceed in parallel.
Addressing the petitioner's concern about non-consideration of objections, the court noted that the respondents had conducted joint spot inspections and provided ample opportunities for objections to be heard. The court deemed the procedures followed by the respondents to be in compliance with the principles of natural justice.
Furthermore, the court emphasized the public interest inherent in completing the highway project, noting that substantial public funds had already been invested and a significant portion of the highway construction was completed. The judgment underscored that public interest outweighs private interests, especially when the project serves a national purpose.
The decision highlights the balance between environmental concerns and infrastructure development, reiterating the legal framework governing such projects. By allowing the acquisition process to proceed, the court has paved the way for the completion of NH948A, a vital infrastructure project aimed at enhancing connectivity and economic growth.
Bottom Line:
National Highways Act, 1956 - Issuance of Section 3D Notification for land acquisition does not require prior Environmental Clearance - Environmental Clearance is mandatory before the commencement of actual construction or execution of the project by the NHAI.
Statutory provision(s): National Highways Act, 1956 Sections 3A, 3D, 3E, 3G, 3H, Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 Notification 2014 OM
Anant Mandgi v. Union of India, (Madras) : Law Finder Doc id # 2870709
