THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 11109 of 2010 Date: 01.07.2010 Between: Uppala Gopala Krishna and others ..... PETITIONERS AND Government of India, rep. By its Secretary, Roads, Transport and Highway, New Delhi and others .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 11109 OF 2010 O R D E R : The petitioners claim to be the owners of small extents of house sites and agricultural lands in Sy.Nos. 495, 496, 505, 511 to 513, 515, 516, 486 and 577 of Pillalamarri Shivar, Raiyani Gudem, Suryapet Revenue village, Suryapet Mandal, Nalgonda District abutting Hyderabad – Vijayawada National Highway No.9. They filed this writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in acquiring their properties situated in the above survey numbers for the purpose of widening/four-laning of N.H.9 from KM 130 to KM 132 is arbitrary and illegal. It is contended that in pursuance of the Public Notice under Section 3-G of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act’) appeared in Hindu daily, dated 17.01.2010 and 25.01.2010, the petitioners submitted their objections before the Tahsildar, Suryapet Mandal. It is alleged that without considering the said objections the notification under Section 3-D of the Act, dated 24.12.2009 was published declaring that the land in question should be acquired. In the counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, it is stated that under the notification dated 18.04.2007 published in the Gazettee under Section 3(a) of the Act, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Suryapet was appointed as competent authority to perform the functions of the authority under the Act. Thereafter, the notification under Section 3-A of the Act dated 24.09.2009 was published proposing to acquire the lands in question for the purpose of widening of 4/6 laning of Hyderabad-Vijayawada section of NH-9. The said notification was also published in two local news papers namely the Hindu, an English daily and Andhra Prabha a Telugu daily dated 231.10.2009 inviting objections from the persons interested within 21 days. It is stated that the petitioners did not raise any objections and therefore, the notification under Section 3-D of the Act was published in the Gazettee on 24.12.2009. Neither a reply affidavit is filed by the petitioner nor any other material could be placed before this Court to contradict the stand taken by the respondents in the counter-affidavit. In the light of the uncontradicted averments in the counter-affidavit supported by the copies of the notifications the contention of the petitioner that the respondents failed to follow the mandatory procedure under the Act is unfounded and cannot be accepted. So far as the objection raised by the petitioners with regard to the alignment is concerned, it is explained in the counter-affidavit that the present alignment was proposed by the competent technical persons who were appointed by the National Highways Authority of India based on various technical aspects and the same was finalized based on the geometric requirements of the Highway. The further contention raised by the petitioners that the respondents ought to have acquired the land on equal width on both sides of the road is also without substance. Even if the petitioners are put to inconvenience by the impugned acquisition, being a matter of policy the same warrants no interference by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the constitution of India. Accordingly, the Writ Petition, which is devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI,J Date: 01.07.2010 KLP