Private Agreement Between Two PSUs Cannot Be Brought Within Purview of NHAI Act: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court observed that any private arrangement between two public sector undertakings (PSUs) cannot be brought within the purview of National Highway Authorities of India Act.
The Court allowed a Writ Petition challenging a land acquisition. The Court noted that the acquisition of the disputed land was initiated solely to compensate Gas Authority Of India Ltd. (GAIL) for the land that was previously used by the National Highway Authority Of India (NHAI).
The Bench of Justice M.G.S. Kamal observed, “Needless to state that the said arrangement is a private arrangement between respondent No.1-NHAI and respondent No.3-GAIL and same cannot be brought in within the purview of National Highway Authorities of India Act, 1988 and in the considered opinion of this Court powers under the National Highway Authorities of India Act, 1988 and National Highways Act, 1956 cannot be pressed into service to compensate respondent No.3-GAIL of its 606 sq. mtrs. utilised by respondent No.1-authority”.
Advocate Spoorthy Hegde N appeared for Arun Kumar (Petitioners) and Additional General Advocate Yogesh D. Naik appeared for the State/NHAI (Respondents).
A Writ Petition was filed seeking a declaration that acquisition proceedings concerning one Arun’s land which was sought to be acquired by NHAI as illegal and arbitrary. Arun Kumar contended that under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 (Act, 1956), NHAI had no power or authority to acquire the land and hand over the same to GAIL.
The Court noted that the issue arose when 606 square meters out of a 1.1-acre plot that had been previously acquired by Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) and was in the possession of GAIL, was included in a 2,929 square meter land acquisition by NHAI. The inclusion of the 606 square meters of land, which had been transferred to GAIL, in the subsequent acquisition by NHAI led to meetings between GAIL and NHAI. The meetings were concluded with NHAI agreeing to acquire the 606 square meters of land. The acquisition of the 606 square meters of land (disputed property), was solely to compensate GAIL for the land that was used by NHAI, as previously stated.
The Court rejected the contentions of NHAI that a holistic reading of Sections 13 and 16 of the NHAI Act would indicate that they were not deprived of the power to acquire land, even if it was not specifically provided for, for incidental and ancillary purposes. The Court after analyzing the minutes of the meeting, noted that the arrangement of acquisition of disputed property was undertaken by NHAI only to compensate GAIL whose 606 sq. mtrs. of land was utilized by the former. The Court observed that the said factum cannot be construed as a need of the land for the purpose defined under the NHAI Act.
Furthermore, the Court asserted that the private arrangement of the abovementioned PSUs does not come under the ambit of the NHAI Act or Act, 1956. The Court observed that the NHAI Act or Act, 1956 cannot be used to compensate GAIL for the 606 square meters of land utilized by NHAI. The Court accepted Petitioner's contentions that such an exercise would amount to an abuse of power that is not otherwise authorized by the statute.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Petition and set aside the acquisition of the disputed land.
Cause Title: Shri. Arun Kumar v National Highways Authority (2023:KHC:37439)
