THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION Nos. 17838, 17841, 17842, 17849 and 17850 of 2011 Dated: 07.07.2011 Between: W.P.No.17838 of 2011 Smt. Bendaru Jayasri, Guntur ..... PETITIONER AND The National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi and 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS W.P.No.17841 of 2011 Mr. Medarametla Srinivas Babu, Guntur …Petitioner And The National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi and 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS W.P.No.17842 of 2011 Smt. Jammula Rushendramani, Guntur and another. …Petitioners And The National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi and 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS W.P.No.17849 of 2011 Mr.Madarametla Ravi Kumar …Petitioner And The National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi and 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS W.P.No.17850 of 2011 Mr. Bandaru Suresh Babu, Guntur. …Petitioner And The National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi and 3 others. .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION Nos. 17838, 17841, 17842, 17849 and 17850 of 2011 COMMON ORDER : All these writ petitions are filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in attempting to demolish the structures in RS.NOs.235/3A, 256-B3A, 256-C2A & 285-A2A of Etukuru Village and RS.No.41-3A of Ramachandrapuram Agraharam Village of Guntur Mandal, Guntur District. It is not in dispute that the properties in question were acquired by initiating proceedings under the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’) for the purpose of widening of National Highway No.5 from four-lane to six-lane. It is also not disputed before this Court that the award was passed on 18.12.2010 and the compensation was paid to the petitioners on 24.02.2011. However, according to the petitioners the value of the structures standing on the lands in question was not included in the award. It is alleged that without completing the proceedings initiated for assessing the value of the structures, the respondents are proceeding to demolish the same. It is pleaded by the petitioners that after payment of the compensation in terms of the Award, dated 18.12.2010, by notice dated 29.03.2011 issued by the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Department, Guntur, the petitioners were informed that the structures/buildings standing on the land acquired would be videographed on 6.4.2011 in connection with the assessment of the value of the said structures and accordingly they were called upon to be present at the spot. Accordingly, the petitioners attended on 6.4.2011. It is clamed that on a request made by the petitioners to grant time to submit the valuation certificate by the competent valuers and other documents, the petitioners were granted time till 30.06.2011. Alleging that without completion of the said proceedings, the respondents started demolition of the structures, these writ petitions are filed. In the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the award dated 18.12.2010 included the value of the structures and after receiving the compensation so awarded, the petitioners had handed over the possession to the respondents on 14.02.2011 and therefore the respondents had rightly proceeded to demolish the structures. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen, whereas the petitioners claimed that the compensation for the structures standing on the land acquired is yet to be determined and paid, it is contended by the respondents that the Award, dated 18.12.2010, included the value of the structures. Such a disputed question of fact cannot be decided by this Court merely on the basis of the affidavits filed by the parties. However in the light of the notices issued by the Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department, Guntur, dated 29.03.2011 informing the petitioners that the structures would be videographed in connection with the assessment of their valuation, the contention of the petitioners that the value of the structures has not yet been assessed cannot be ignored and to that extent the interest of the petitioners needs to be protected. It is true that as per as per sub-section (5) of Section 3G of the Act, if the amount determined by the competent authority is not acceptable to either of the parties, it is open to the aggrieved party to make an application before the District Collector who is the designated arbitrator under the Act. However if the structures standing on the land in question are removed without assessing their value, it may not be possible for the petitioners to substantiate their claim for compensation for the structures even if they propose to initiate proceedings under Section 3G (5) of the Act. Therefore I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioners to get the buildings in question assessed by an approved valuer before the buildings/structures are demolished so that the same can be taken into consideration if any proceedings are initiated as provided under the Act for enhancement of compensation. Accordingly, the petitioners are hereby permitted to get the buildings/structures in question assessed by an approved valuer and submit the same to the 2nd respondent within a period of three weeks from today. Till such time, the respondents shall not demolish the buildings/structures in question. All the Writ Petitions are accordingly disposed of leaving it open to the petitioners to take appropriate steps as provided under Section 3G (5) of the Act for enhancement of the compensation, if so advised. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 07.07.2011 Note:- Furnish CC in 2 days. (B/O) KLP