ADVERTISEMENT
Madras High Court
V.Kattappan (Died) 1. K.Magesh vs The Government Of India on 30 June, 2026
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.06.2026
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
AND
C.M.P.Nos.809, 813 & 12833 of 2024
W.A.No.143 of 2024
V.Kattappan (Died)
K.Magesh
Flat No.1A, Door No.100,
Plot No.1023, VI Avenue,
Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040
Appellant(s)
Vs
1. The Government of India
Rep by its Secretary,
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Transport Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001.
2.The National Highways Authority of India
G5 and 6, Sector 10, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
3.The District Collector
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District – 602 001.
___________
Page 1 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
4.The Competent Authority
Special District Revenue Officer,
(Land Acquisition National Highways-716B),
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District – 602 001.
5.The Project Director
The National Highways Authority of India,
No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram
West, Chennai – 600 045.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside
the order dated 01.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.18497 of 2021.
For Appellant(s) : Mr.V.C.Janardhanan
for Mr.G.RM.Palaniappan
For Respondent(s) : Mr.K.Srinivasa Murthy
Senior Panel Counsel Central Government for R1
Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan
Additional Solicitor General of India
Assisted by Mrs.S.R.Sumathy
Standing Counsel for R2
Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali
Government Pleader for RR3 and 4
WA.No.1782 of 2024
The Project Director
The National Highways Authority of India
Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh State
Appellant(s)
___________
Page 2 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
Vs
1. V.Kattapan (Died)
S/o.C.Vadivel Reddy,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District-602 066
2.The District Collector
Thiruvallur , Thiruvallur District - 602 001.
3.The Competent Authority and Special
District Revenue Officer (LA)
National Highways - 716B, Tiruvallur,
Tiruvallur District.
4.K.Vanaroja
Legal Heir of V.Kattappan,
Door No.48, Kammalar Street,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
5.K.Magesh
Legal Heir of V.Kattappan,
Door No.48, Kammalar Street,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
6.K.Kalpana
Legal Heir of V.Kattappan,
Door No.48, Kammalar Street,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
(Deceased R1 is substituted by his LRs viz., RR4 to 6,
vide order dt. 02.04.2024 made in CMP.No.5625/2024
in WA.SR.No.15578/2023)
Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside
the order dated 01.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.26216 of 2022.
___________
Page 3 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
For Appellant(s) : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan
Additional Solicitor General of India
Assisted by Mrs.S.R.Sumathy
Standing Counsel
For Respondent(s) : Mr.V.C.Janardhanan
for Mr.G.RM.Palaniappan for R1
Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali
Government Pleader for RR2 and 3
W.A.No.1784 of 2024
1. The District Collector
Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur District-602001
2.The Competent Authority And
Special District Revenue Officer (LA),
National Highways-716B, Thiruvallur,
Thiruvallur District-602001
Appellant(s)
Vs
1. V.Kattappan(died)
S/o.C.Vadivel Reddy,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District-602066
2.The Project Director
The National Highways Authority of India,
Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh
3.K.Vanaroja
Legal Heir of V.Kattappan,
Door No.48, Kammalar Street,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
___________
Page 4 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
4.K.Magesh
Legal Heir of V.Kattappan,
Door No.48, Kammalar Street,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
5.K.Kalpana
Legal Heir of V.Kattappan,
Door No.48, Kammalar Street,
Parandur Village, Uthukottai Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
(Deceased R1 is substituted by his LRs viz., RR3 to 5,
vide order dt. 02.04.2024 made in CMP.No.2836/2024
in WA.SR.No.90696/2023)
Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside
the order dated 01.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.26216 of 2022.
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali
Government Pleader
For Respondent(s) : Mr.V.C.Janardhanan
in all cases for Mr.G.RM.Palaniappan for R1
Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan
Additional Solicitor General of India
Assisted by Mrs.S.R.Sumathy
Standing Counsel for R2
___________
Page 5 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
COMMOM JUDGMENT
(Delivered by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)
Assailing the order dated 01.11.2022 made in W.P.No.26216 of
2022, whereby the writ Court allowed the writ petition filed by the first
respondent/land owner (now substituted by his legal heirs respondents
4 to 6, since first respondent died) by setting aside the Award
No.17/2021 dated 14.09.2021 and remanded the matter to the
competent authority/Special District Revenue Officer (LA), for
recomputation of compensation, the Project Director, National
Highways Authority of India has preferred W.A.No.1782 of 2024.
2. Aggrieved by the same order dated 01.11.2022 made in
W.P.No.26216 of 2022, the District Collector, Tiruvallur District and the
Competent Authority/Special District Revenue Officer (LA) have
preferred a separate appeal in W.A.No.1784 of 2024.
3. The land owner filed W.A.No.143 of 2024 challenging the
separate order dated 01.11.2022 passed in W.P.No.18497 of 2021,
wherein his challenge to the notification issued under Sub-sections (3)
and (4) of Section 3G the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter
___________
Page 6 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
referred to as “the Act”) came to be rejected, holding that the relief
sought had rendered infructuous, since the land has already been
utilized and further upon the issuance of the Section 3D notification,
the land absolutely vests with the Government.
4. Since the issues involved in all the three writ appeals arise out
of the same land acquisition proceedings, the appeals were heard
analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
5. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per
their rank in W.A.No.1782 of 2024.
6. The relevant facts of the case are that the first respondent/
writ petitioner was the owner of lands measuring 3.30 acres comprised
in survey Nos.171/1A, 174/1B, 172/2B and 172/2A1 of Perandur
Village, Uthukottai Taluk, Tiruvallur District. These lands were sought
to be acquired by the appellant/NHAI for the expansion of National
Highway 716-B. Consequently, a notification under Section 3A(1) of
the Act was issued on 03.03.2020, declaring the intention to acquire a
portion of the above lands.
___________
Page 7 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
6.1. The first respondent submitted objections on 04.04.2020.
After considering the remarks furnished by the appellant, the third
respondent/competent authority passed an order on 07.09.2020
rejecting the said objections. Pursuant to this rejection, a declaration
under Section 3D(1) of the Act was issued on 09.02.2021.
Subsequently, a notice for the award enquiry under Section 3G(3) and
(4) of the Act was issued on 20.07.2021, and the award enquiry was
conducted on 04.08.2021. Ultimately, the third respondent/competent
authority passed Award No. 17/2021 on 14.09.2021.
6.2. The first respondent filed W.P.No.26216 of 2022 challenging
the award dated 14.09.2021 and another writ petition, W.P.No.18497
of 2021 challenging the notification dated 03.03.2020 issued under
Section 3A(1) of the Act and the consequential notification issued
under Sections 3G(3) and (4) of the Act for award enquiry.
6.3. The writ Court by finding that the relevant documents were
not considered while arriving at the market value while passing the
award as contemplated under Section 3G(7) of the Act, had quashed
the award and remitted the matter to the competent authority/third
___________
Page 8 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
respondent, for fresh computation. Consequently, the writ Court
dismissed the other writ petition, observing that on issuance of
notification under Section 3D, the subject land vests absolutely with
the Government and further, since the land had already been utilized
for the project, the challenge to the notification had rendered
infructuous. Assailing the order setting aside the award, two separate
appeals have been preferred, one by the NHAI and another by the
State. The landowner preferred the remaining appeal, assailing the
dismissal of his challenge to the notification.
7. Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General
appearing for the NHAI, contended that once the competent authority
determines the compensation and passes an award under Section
3G(1) of the Act in compliance with the procedure under Sections
3G(2) to (4), any party aggrieved by the decision must approach the
District Collector/second respondent, who is the arbitrator, empowered
to determine the compensation under Section 3G(5) of the Act by
following the procedure under Section 3G(6) and (7) of the Act. When
the scheme of the Act provides for arbitration challenging the award,
the writ Court had erroneously set aside the award which is legally
impermissible.
___________
Page 9 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
8. The learned Additional Solicitor General further submitted that
when the first respondent seeks higher compensation pursuant to the
acquisition made under the notification, he cannot parallelly challenge
the notification itself, thereby invoking two parallel proceedings which
is unsustainable. He further submitted that insofar as the contention
regarding the striking down of Section 3G(5) of the Act is concerned,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of M/s.Riar Builders Pvt.
Ltd. and Another v. Union Bank of India and Others (SLP (Civil)
Diary No. 26933/2025 decided on 30.05.2025), by interim order,
has stayed the operation of the Punjab and Haryana High Court's
decision and further directed that the proceedings under Section 3G(5)
of the Act and Sections 34, 36, and 37 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and the execution of arbitral awards shall
continue in accordance with law and, therefore, the order passed by
the writ Court is completely arbitrary and unsustainable.
9. Mr.Mohammed Fayaz Ali, learned Government Pleader
appearing for the State also made submissions in line with the
arguments of the learned Additional Solicitor General.
___________
Page 10 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
10. Per contra, Mr.V.C.Janardhanan, learned counsel appearing
for the land owner/writ petitioner (now represented by his legal heirs),
submitted that since the relevant documents were not considered by
the competent authority while arriving at the compensation, the writ
Court merely remanded the matter to the competent authority to
recompute the compensation after taking those documents into
consideration. He further submitted that in compliance with the
directions, a new award has already been passed and, therefore, no
interference is required at this stage.
11. He further contended that the learned Judge had erroneously
dismissed the writ petition challenging the notification finding that the
land vests absolutely with the Government upon the mere issuance of
a Section 3D notice, which is contrary to the statutory provisions of
the Act, and, therefore, the impugned order warrants the interference
of this Court.
12. We heard the submissions made on either side and
considered the materials available on record.
___________
Page 11 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
13. A portion of the land belonging to the first respondent/writ
petitioner was sought to be acquired by the appellant/NHAI for the
purpose of expansion of National Highways 716-B. A notification under
Section 3A(1) of the Act, declaring intention to acquire, was issued on
03.03.2020 and the objections submitted by the land owner were
rejected on 07.09.2020. Subsequently, a declaration under Section 3D
of the Act was made through a notification dated 09.02.2021. Notice
under Sections 3G(3) and (4) of the Act was issued on 20.07.2021 and
after award enquiry, award No.17/2021 was passed on 14.09.2021.
14. The procedure for determination of compensation for the
lands acquired under the Act is governed by Section 3G of the Act. For
easy reference, Section 3G is extracted hereunder:
“3G.Determination of amount payable as compensation
(1)Where any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid
an amount which shall be determined by an order of the
competent authority.
(2)Where the right of user or any right in the nature of an
easement on, any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be
paid an amount to the owner and any other person whose right of
enjoyment in that land has been affected in any manner
whatsoever by reason of such acquisition an amount calculated at
___________
Page 12 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
ten per cent. of the amount determined under sub-section (1), for
that land.
(3)Before proceeding to determine the amount under sub-
section (1) or sub-section (2), the competent authority shall give a
public notice published in two local newspapers, one of which will
be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons
interested in the land to be acquired.
(4)Such notice shall state the particulars of the land and shall
require all persons interested in such land to appear in person or
by an agent or by a legal practitioner referred to in sub-section (2)
of section 3C, before the competent authority, at a time and place
and to state the nature of their respective interest in such land.
(5)If the amount determined by the competent authority under
sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either of the
parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the
parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the
Central Government.
(6)Subject to the provisions of this Act, the provisions of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to
every arbitration under this Act.
(7)The competent authority or the arbitrator while determining
the amount under sub-section (1) or sub-section (5), as the case
may be, shall take into consideration-
(a)the market value of the land on the date of publication of
the notification under section 3A;
___________
Page 13 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
(b)the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at
the time of taking possession of the land, by reason of the
severing of such land from other land;
(c)the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at
the time of taking possession of the land, by reason of the
acquisition injuriously affecting his other immovable property in
any manner, or his earnings;
(d)if, in consequences of the acquisition of the land, the person
interested is compelled to change his residence or place of
business, the reasonable expenses, if any, incidental to such
change.”
15. As per Section 3G(1) of the Act, where any land is acquired
under this Act, there shall be paid an amount which shall be determined
by an order of the competent authority. The competent authority while
fixing the compensation would follow the procedures set out under
Sections 3G(2), (4) and (7). Once the award is passed by the
competent authority determining the compensation, Section 3H
contemplates that the amount so determined under Section 3G shall
be deposited with the competent authority before taking possession of
the land.
___________
Page 14 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
16. If the amount determined by the competent authority under
Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) of Section 3G is not acceptable to
either of the parties, i.e., the landowner or the NHAI, Section 3G(5)
postulates that, upon application by the either party, the arbitrator
appointed by the Central Government shall determine the
compensation. The District Collector/second respondent, has been
appointed as the Arbitrator by the Government. The proceedings
before the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) shall be conducted in
accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 and the Arbitrator, while deciding the arbitration to determine the
compensation amount, shall take into account the procedures
contemplated under Section 3G(7).
17. A bare perusal of the above provision, leaves no manner of
doubt that once an award under Section 3G(1) is passed by the
competent authority, the only remedy available to the landowner is to
challenge the award by preferring an arbitration petition before the
District Collector under Section 3G(5) of the Act.
___________
Page 15 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
18. In the instant case, instead of choosing to file an arbitration
petition before the second respondent/District Collector, the first
respondent chose to challenge the award through a writ petition. Even
though the first respondent raised several grounds in challenging the
award, the learned Judge, by calling for the records and analyzing
documents of the nearby lands, came to the conclusion that some of
the documents ought to have been taken into account and
subsequently found fault with the amount determined as
compensation.
19. The learned Judge had in fact assumed the role of the
arbitrator in deciding the challenge to the award, which is
impermissible and cannot be sustained. It is to be noted that the writ
Court had not interfered with the award on the grounds of lack of
jurisdiction or failure to afford proper opportunity of being heard to the
parties. When the learned Judge found no fault regarding jurisdiction
or lack of opportunity, the only course open was to relegate the party
to file an arbitration petition challenging the award, as contemplated
under Section 3G(5) of the Act. Instead, the writ Court analysed the
documents and concluded that several documents were not taken into
account when arriving at the compensation amount and thereby
___________
Page 16 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
quashed the award and remanded the matter for fresh determination.
The writ petitioner, being satisfied with the remand for recomputation
of the compensation, did not prefer any appeal.
20. At this juncture, it is also useful to refer to the order passed
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as cited by the learned Additional
Solicitor General, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court, while staying
the operation of the judgment delivered by the Punjab and Haryana
High Court declaring Section 3G of the Act unconstitutional, directed
that all pending proceedings under Section 3G(5) of the Act and the
proceedings under the Arbitration Act, including execution, shall
continue in accordance with law.
21. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United
Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon and Others [(2010) 8 SCC
110] held that when an alternative and efficacious remedy is
available, issues cannot ordinarily be adjudicated in a writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the parties must be
relegated to the competent authority. Once it is concluded that the writ
petition filed by the first respondent challenging the award is not
maintainable and that the proper remedy is to file an arbitration
___________
Page 17 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
petition before the second appellant/District Collector under Section
3G(5) of the Act, the only logical corollary is to set aside the order
passed by the writ Court thereby granting liberty to respondents 4 to
6, as legal heirs, to pursue arbitration challenging the award.
22. Accordingly, W.A.No.1782 and 1784 of 2024 stands allowed
and the order passed by the writ Court dated 01.11.2022 in
W.P.No.26216 of 2022 is set aside.
23. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the first
respondent that the other writ petition challenging the notification
ought not to have been dismissed by the writ Court with the
observation that once the notification under Section 3D of the Act was
issued, the land vests with the Government, ignoring the fact that
compensation had not been paid. In this regard, it is useful to refer to
Section 3E of the Act, which reads as under:
3E. Power to take possession -
(1)Where any land has vested in the Central Government
under sub-section (2) of section 3D, and the amount determined
by the competent authority under section 3G with respect to such
land has been deposited under sub-section (1) of section 3H, with
the competent authority by the Central Government, the
competent authority may by notice in writing direct the owner as
___________
Page 18 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
well as any other person who may be in possession of such land to
surrender or deliver possession thereof to the competent authority
or any person duly authorised by it in this behalf within sixty days
of the service of the notice.
(2)If any person refuses or fails to comply with any direction
made under sub-section (1), the competent authority shall apply—
(a)in the case of any land situated in any area falling
within the metropolitan area, to the Commissioner of Police;
(b)in case of any land situated in any area other than the
area referred to in clause (a), to the Collector of a District,
and such Commissioner or Collector, as the case may be, shall
enforce the surrender of the land, to the competent authority or to
the person duly authorised by it.”
24. As per Section 3E of the Act, when once the notification is
issued under Section 3D(1) and the amount determined by the
competent authority under Section 3G(1) is deposited under Section
3H(1) of the Act, the competent authority may, by notice, direct the
owner to deliver possession. The learned Additional Solicitor General
submitted that immediately after passing of the Award No.17/2021
dated 14.09.2021, the compensation arrived at was deposited before
the Court concerned and, therefore, the arguments raised by the first
respondent are totally misplaced.
___________
Page 19 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
25. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the first respondent
seeks permission to withdraw the deposited compensation amount.
Once the award has been passed and the compensation amount is
deposited, the competent authority is entitled to take possession of
the land under Section 3E of the Act. Accordingly, liberty is granted to
the respondents 4 to 6 to withdraw the compensation amount
deposited before the Court concerned and to prefer an arbitration
petition challenging the award, if so advised.
26. Resultantly, W.A.No.1782 of 2024 and W.A.No.1784 of 2024
are allowed, while W.A.No.143 of 2024 stands dismissed. There shall
be no order as to costs. Consequently, interim applications stand
closed.
(SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)
30.06.2026
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
gya
___________
Page 20 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
To
1. The Secretary
Government of India
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Transport Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001.
2.The National Highways Authority of India
G5 & 6, Sector 10, Dwarka,
New Delhi.
3.The District Collector
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District – 602 001.
4.The Competent Authority
Special District Revenue Officer,
(Land Acquisition National Highways-716B),
Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District – 602 001.
5.The Project Director
The National Highways Authority of India,
No.7/16, Govindarajan Street, Tambaram
West, Chennai – 600 045.
___________
Page 21 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.
gya
W.A.Nos.143, 1782 & 1784 of 2024
SPONSORED
30.06.2026
___________
Page 22 of 22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
