https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308034 The acquisition notification under the National Highways Act, 1956 was upheld because the challenge based on expiry of the time limit under Sections 3-A and 3-D was rejected on the facts and the notification was found to be in order. However, the compensation award was quashed to the extent challenged because Section 3-G required prior publication of notice in two newspapers and an opportunity to object before determination of compensation, and the record did not show compliance. That statutory breach also amounted to a violation of natural justice, so the writ petition was maintainable despite the alternative remedy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Liberty was left to raise objections and have the matter decided afresh in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 May 2023 09:10:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308034 The acquisition notification under the National Highways Act, 1956 was upheld because the challenge based on expiry of the time limit under Sections 3-A and 3-D was rejected on the facts and the notification was found to be in order. However, the compensation award was quashed to the extent challenged because Section 3-G required prior publication of notice in two newspapers and an opportunity to object before determination of compensation, and the record did not show compliance. That statutory breach also amounted to a violation of natural justice, so the writ petition was maintainable despite the alternative remedy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Liberty was left to raise objections and have the matter decided afresh in accordance with law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308034