Mandatory public notice before compensation determination under the National Highways Act was required, and non-compliance invalidated the award.

The publication requirement under Section 3G(3) of the National Highways Act, 1956 was treated as a mandatory safeguard before compensation is determined. The Court noted the scheme separates acquisition, vesting, and compensation, and requires public notice in two local newspapers, including one vernacular paper, before the competent authority fixes compensation. Because the record did not show compliance, the notice cited Section 3D instead of Section 3G(3), no corrigendum was issued, and the explanation was rejected, the compensation award could not be sustained to that extent.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notice required before determination of compensation under Section 3G(3) of the National Highways Act, 1956 was mandatory and, if not duly published, whether the compensation award could be sustained.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under Sections 3A, 3D and 3G creates distinct stages: declaration of acquisition, vesting of land, and thereafter determination of compensation. Section 3G(3) specifically requires a public notice in two local newspapers, one in a vernacular language, before the competent authority proceeds to determine compensation. The material on record did not establish compliance with that requirement. The respondents' notice referred to Section 3D instead of Section 3G(3), no corrigendum was issued, and the explanation offered was not accepted. The Court treated the publication requirement as a substantive safeguard intended to afford affected landowners an opportunity to place their claims before compensation is fixed.

Conclusion: The statutory notice under Section 3G(3) was mandatory, the procedure was not followed, and the compensation award could not be sustained to that extent.

---