Shri Kumar Gyanendra Singh v. Competent Authority Special Land Acquisition Officer

SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar's order with Signatures COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

WPMS/1517/2026

Smt Meghna Bisht --Petitioner Versus Competent Authority Special Land Acquisition Officer and others --Respondents With WPMS/1522/2026 WPMS/1523/2026 WPMS/1525/2026 Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Sagar Kothari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Devendra Pant and Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Naresh Pant, Advocate through video conferencing for NHAI.

¶2Since common questions of facts and law are involved in these petitions, therefore, these are being heard and decided together. However, for the sake of brevity and convenience, facts of Writ Petition (MS) No. 1517 of 2026, alone are being considered and discussed.

¶3According to petitioner, her land situate in village East Hope Town, Pachhuwadoon, Tehsil Vikasnagar, District Dehradun was acquired for construction of highway under the provision of National Highways Act, 1956 and possession of acquired land was

taken in 2023.

¶4Grievance raised by petitioner is that neither the amount payable as compensation has been determined by the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition, nor any payment has been released in favour of the petitioner.

¶5Relief sought in WPMS No. 1517 of 2026 is extracted below:

"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding/directing the respondents to release and pay full and fair compensation to the petitioner for her acquired land, alongwith interest and all statutory benefits, as provided under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013."

¶6Learned State Counsel, however, submits that in the Notification issued under Section 3A-1 of National Highways Act, 1956, there is no mention about the land belonging to the petitioner. He thus submits that petitioner's land appears to not have been acquired.

¶7In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a document issued by Revenue Authorities to the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition, for contending

that petitioner's land was, in fact, affected by acquisition.

¶8Mr. Naresh Pant, Advocate for NHAI appearing virtually, submits that if petitioner makes representation to the Competent Authority, the same shall be dealt with, as per law.

¶9Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has already made a representation to the Competent Authority on

07.06.2023, which is yet to be considered.

¶10Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of by directing the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition, Dehradun to take decision on petitioner's representation, as per law, if possible within ten weeks from date of presentation of certified copy of this order.

¶11It goes without saying that all other stakeholders, including NHAI shall be given reasonable opportunity of hearing before taking any decision on the representation of the petitioner.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)

29.07.2026 Mahinder

MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BABA 43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2026.07.30 19:47:29 +05'30'