1. The short grievance of the Petitioners regardless of the lengthy pleadings & prayer is as to land forcibly being taken away by the Authorities for the expansion of the road in question even when they are not agreeable thereto.

2. Learned counsel for the Petitioners argues that the Right to Property though not a Fundamental Right is constitutionally guaranteed under Article 300A; his clients cannot be compelled to give up their property except in accordance with law; his clients are not agreeable for relinquishing their property and therefore, if at all the State wants these properties, the acquisition process under 2013 Act is the only course open. He argues that his clients’ ownership & possession should be protected from interference of the Respondents save with the authority of law.

3. Learned AGA appearing for the State and the learned Panel Counsel appearing for the Respondent – Authority together submit that some of land owners have agreed and accordingly given up their lands by executing Relinquishment Deeds and therefore, this course is open to the Petitioners as well wherein the compensation payable would be three times the Guideline value keeping in view the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. So contending, they both seek dismissal of these Writ Petitions.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submission made on behalf of the Petitioners that their lands cannot be touched by the State and the authorities, save by acquisition in accordance with law the Right to Property having been constitutionally guaranteed. If others have given up their land, that cannot be a legal ground to compel the Petitioners to give up their land too, since constitutionally guaranteeed avails to the property of individuals and not necessarily the collection of individuals. An argument to the contrary would undermine the sanctity & efficacy of Article 300A and therefore, cannot be countenanced.

In the above circumstances, these Writ Petitions succeed in part; the Respondents are restrained from interfering with the properties of the Petitioners till after the same are acquired in accordance with law, namely 2013 Act.

Ordered accordingly.

No costs.