State of Kerala represented by Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Kerala v Abdul Manaf P.M, Meharoof C.N, Lathief K, Nirmala P, K. Sreesan Vaidyar, N.K. Khadeeja, Shameema T.K, P.K. Hafsath, K.C. Abdul Hameed, K. Mariyumma, S.A.P Naser, K. Sulaikha, K. Sulu Shahnash, K. Thahira, Valapattanam Grama Panchayath, Chirakkal Grama Panchayath, Kerala Road Fund Board

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.J.DESAI ``` ## **`&`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 25TH MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2945/2022 DATED 05.01.2024 OF HIGH ``` ``` COURT OF KERALA ``` ## **`APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6 IN WP(C):`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695 001., PIN - 695001` - `2 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001., PIN - 695001` - `3 CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001., PIN - 695001` - `4 DISTRICT COLLECTOR KANNUR DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, THAVAKKARA, KANNUR-670 002., PIN - 670002` - `5 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, KANNUR-670 002., PIN - 670002` - `6 SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) PWD NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, COLLECTORATE, KANNUR-670 002., PIN - 670002 BY ADAV. K.V.MANOJKUMAR, SPL GP` ## **`RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 7 TO 9 IN WP(C):`** - `1 ABDUL MANAF P.M AGED 44 YEARS RUKHIYAMANZIL, VIVEKANANDA ROAD, CHIRAKKAL P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 011, PIN - 670011` - `2 MEHAROOF C.N, REHATH MANZIL, PULLOOPPI, KANNADIPARAMBA P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 604., PIN - 670604` - `3 LATHIEF K, SAFA, KOLLARATHICKAL PALLI, KOTTAMPALLI P.O, KANNUR DISTICT-670 011, PIN - 670011` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -2- ``` - `4 NIRMALA P, SREE NALLANJIPARAMBA, PALLIKUNNU P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 004, PIN - 670004` - `5 K. SREESAN VAIDYAR, SOUMINI NIVAS, NEAR RAJENDRA NAGAR HOUSING COLONY, 2ND STAGE, PALLIKUNNU P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 004., PIN - 670004` - `6 N.K. KHADEEJA, N.K. HOUSE, THKAMBAD P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 301., PIN - 670301` - `7 SHAMEEMA T.K, D/O MOHAMMED KUNJI HAJI, FATHIMAS, CORIMUKU, KOYYAMKODU P.O.CHUVARTHOO, KASARGODE DISTRICT., PIN - 671121` - `8 P.K. HAFSATH, HAFSATHMANZIL, KOLLARATHIKKAL, CHIRAKKAL P.O.KANNUR DISTRICCT-670 011., PIN - 670011` - `9 K.C.ABDUL HAMEED, AYSHA MAHAL, MODOYI P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 325., PIN - 670325` - `10 K.MARIYUMMA, HAJI MANZIL, VEVEKANANDA ROAD, CHIRAKKAL P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 011., PIN - 670011` - `11 S.A.P NASEER, S/O IBRAHIMKUTTY, JAMEELAS KOTTAMPILLY ROAD, CHIRAKKAL P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 011., PIN - 670011` - `12 K. SULAIKHA, W/O DR. O.T.YOOSUF, SUSHARA, KOTTALI P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 005., PIN - 670005` - `13 K. SULU SHAHNAS, D/O O.T.YOOSUF, SUSHARA, KOTTALI P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 005., PIN - 670005` - `14 K. THAHIRA, W/O ABDUL JABBAR, TAJ, VIVEKANANDA ROAD, PUTHIYATHERU, CHIRAKKAL P.O.KANNUR DISTRICT-670 011., PIN - 670011` - `15 VALAPATTANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VALAPATTANAM , KANNUR-670 010, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 670010` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -3- ``` - `16 CHIRAKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHIRAKKAL, KANNUR DISTICT-670 561, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 670561` - `17 KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD, T.C.27/287, SPORTS COMPLEX, CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, STADIUM, PALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM - 695033, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN., PIN - 695033` ``` ADV. RENOY VINCENT FOR R1; ADV. MEGHA G. FOR ADV.I.V.PRAMOD FOR R16; ADV. ADHEELA NOWRIYA FOR ADV. MUHAMMED SHAFI FOR R15 ``` ``` THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -4- ``` ## **JUDGMENT** ## **A.J.DESAI, CJ.** By way of the present appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, the State of Kerala has challenged the judgment dated 05.01.2024, delivered by the learned Single Judge in the captioned W.P.(C) No.2945/2022 along with another W.P. (C)No.29569/2021, by which, the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition filed by the private respondents by quashing and setting aside Ext.P14 series of orders as well as Ext.P6 recommendation submitted by the Expert Group established under Section 7 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “LARR Act”). The learned Single Judge further quashed and set aside Ext.P7 Government Order accepting the report and Ext.P9 notification issued by the State ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -5- ``` Government. Short facts arising out of the writ appeal are as under; 2. The private respondents herein / the original petitioners, who are residents of Chirakkal and Valapattanam Grama Panchayats, and whose lands are sought to be acquired for widening of the National Highway 66 between Manna Junction and new National Highway Bypass Junction had challenged the acquisition proceedings on several grounds and ultimately prayed as under: “(i) To declare that Rule 18(1) RCTLARR (Kerala) Rules, 2015 limiting the time period for filing objection to 15 days as against 60 days as stipulated under Section 15 of the Fair Compensation Act is ultra vires to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. (ii) To declare that the Form Nos. 7 and 7A issued by the 1[st] Respondent under Rule 18(1) of the RCTLARR (Kerala) Rules, 2015 limiting the time period for filing objection to 15 days as against 60 days as stipulated under Section 15 of the Fair Compensation Act, is ultra vires to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. (iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -6- ``` writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P14 series orders passed by the 4[th] Respondent; and (iv) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P5 Report submitted under Section 4 of the Fair Compensation Act; and (v) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit-P6 submitted under Section 7 of the Fair Compensation Act; and (vi) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit-P7 Government Order issued by the 1[st] Respondent under Section 8 of the Fair Compensation Act; and (vii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P9 Notification issued by the 1[st] respondent issued under Section 11 of the Fair Compensation Act; and (viii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents 1 to 5 to consider Exhibit P3 proposal submitted by the Petitioners and others in the locality and make ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` consequential modifications; and Grant such other and incidental reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and necessary in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case; and (ix) To allow the Writ Petition (Civil) with costs to the Petitioners.” 3. The appellant State filed counter affidavit in the writ petition and the learned Single Judge, allowed the writ petition, directing the appellant State authorities to constitute an Expert Group strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the “LARR Act”, conduct study and thereafter take further steps in the acquisition proceedings. 4. Learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the appellant would submit that the learned Single Judge has committed error in allowing the petition. He would submit that Section 7 of the “LARR Act” empower the State Government to form an independent multi-disciplinary Expert Group for evaluating Social Impact Assessment report and making its recommendation with regard to the proposal for land acquisition. He would submit that the constitution of the Expert Group was in accordance with Section 7 ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -8- ``` of the LARR Act, which require two members of the group to be representatives of the Panchayat, Grama Sabha, Municipality or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be. In the instant case, there are two members from the Municipal Corporation and hence, the learned Single Judge has committed error in holding that members of the relevant Panchayats are also required to be included in the Expert Group. He would further submit that when the Social Impact Assessment report was prepared through a private agency, the representatives of the Panchayats were also heard and the issues raised by them considered. Thereafter only the agency forwarded Ext.P5 report which has been accepted and therefore, no prejudice is likely to be caused to the petitioners. In support of the same, learned Government Pleader relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in **Dharampal Satyapal Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Gauhati and Others [(2015) 8 SCC 519].** He would further submit that by order dated 29.06.2016, the Government of Kerala has authorised the District Collectors to constitute Expert Groups consisting of seven members for evaluating the Social Impact Assessment report. As ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ## **`-9-`** per the Government order, from among the two representatives of Grama Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation nominated by the District Collector, one shall be a woman. Accordingly, a lady member from the Municipal Corporation was included in the Expert Group. He would submit that, this notification dated 29.06.2016 was never challenged by the original petitioners and therefore, the learned Single Judge ought not to have allowed the writ petition. 5. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the provisions of Section 7 of the “LARR Act” is mandatory in nature. The representation of the Panchayat in the Expert Group is made mandatory and therefore, the learned Single Judge has committed no error in allowing the writ petition. 6. We heard the learned Counsel appearing for respective parties. 7. Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, came to be incorporated on 27.09.2013, and the objectives referred to in the ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -10- ``` Act are as under: “An Act to ensure, in consultation with institutions of local self-government and Gram Sabhas established under the Constitution, a humane, participative, informed and transparent process for land acquisition for industrialization, development of essential infrastructural facilities and urbanization with the least disturbance to the owners of the land and other affected families and provide just and fair compensation to the affected families whose land has been acquired or proposed to be acquired or are affected by such acquisition and make adequate provisions for such affected persons for their rehabilitation and resettlement and for ensuring that the cumulative outcome of compulsory acquisition should be that affected persons become partners in development leading to an improvement in their post acquisition social and economic status and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” Thus, the Act envisages humane, participative, informed and transparent process for land acquisition in consultative with the institution of local Self Government. The purpose of Section 7, requiring the inclusion of members of the Panchayats, either Grama Panchayat or Grama Sabha, Municipality or Municipal Corporation ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -11- ``` is to ensure such participation while the expert group evaluates evaluating the social impact assessment report and makes its recommendation. Section 7 of the Act reads as under: “7. Appraisal of Social Impact Assessment report by an Expert Group.–(1) The appropriate Government shall ensure that the Social Impact Assessment report is evaluated by an independent multi-disciplinary Expert Group, as may be constituted by it. - (2) The Expert Group constituted under sub-section (1) shall include the following, namely:— - (a) two non-official social scientists; - (b) two representatives of Panchayat, Gram Sabha, - Municipality or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be; - (c) two experts on rehabilitation; and - (d) a technical expert in the subject relating to the project. - (3) The appropriate Government may nominate a person from amongst the members of the Expert Group as the Chairperson of the Group. - (4) If the Expert Group constituted under sub-section (1), is of the opinion that,— - (a) the project does not serve any public purpose; or - (b) the social costs and adverse social impacts of the project outweigh the potential benefits, ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ## **`-12-`** it shall make a recommendation within two months from the date of its constitution to the effect that the project shall be abandoned forthwith and no further steps to acquire the land will be initiated in respect of the same: PROVIDED that the grounds for such recommendation shall be recorded in writing by the Expert Group giving the details and reasons for such decision: PROVIDED FURTHER that where the appropriate Government, inspite of such recommendations, proceeds with the acquisition, then, it shall ensure that its reasons for doing so are recorded in writing. (5) If the Expert Group constituted under sub-section (1), is of the opinion that,— (a) the project will serve any public purpose; and (b) the potential benefits outweigh the social costs and adverse social impacts, it shall make specific recommendations within two months from the date of its constitution whether the extent of land proposed to be acquired is the absolute bare-minimum extent needed for the project and whether there are no other less displacing options available: PROVIDED that the grounds for such recommendation shall be recorded in writing by the Expert Group giving the details and reasons for such ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ## **`-13-`** decision. (6) The recommendations of the Expert Group referred to in sub-sections (4) and (5) shall be made available in the local language to the Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be, and the offices of the District Collector, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Tehsil, and shall be published in the affected areas, in such manner as may be prescribed and uploaded on the website of the appropriate Government.” 8. Section 7 (2b) of the Act makes it mandatory that the Expert Group constituted under Sub Section (1) of Section 7 shall include two representatives of Grama Panchayat, Grama Sabha, Municipality or Municipal Corporation, as the case may be. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that when land within a Panchayat is sought to be acquired there shall be two representatives from that Panchayat. Similarly, in the case of Municipality or Municipal Corporation, two representatives from the local body concerned shall be included in the Expert Group. It cannot be said that, in the case of a joint acquisition, in which land from the Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation area is ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -14- ``` being acquired, two representatives of any of the local body is sufficient. In that case, two representatives each from the Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation are required to be included in the Expert Group. This requirement cannot be met by the representatives of the Panchayat being heard at the stage of preparation of social impact assessment report. It is settled law that when the statute mandates something to be done in a particular manner, it shall be done in that manner alone. In the present case, it is clear that no members from any of the Panchayats were included in the Expert Group constituted under sub Section (1) of Section 7. Therefore, subsequent consideration and approval of the the recommendation made by the Expert Group, would not also suffice. For the purpose of acquisition proceedings, when an Expert Group is constituted for evaluating the report, two representatives of the local bodies affected by the acquisition proceedings shall be included in the Expert Group. In the present case, members of the Chirakkal and Valappattanam Panchayats which are also affected, are not included in the Expert Group. Therefore, the learned Single Judge, after considering the relevant provisions of law, has ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -15- ``` committed no error in allowing the petition. The decision relied on by the learned Government Pleader deals with the situation where principles of natural justice are violated, whereas, in the instant case, the violation is of a statutory mandate. Being so, the question whether the petitioners are prejudiced by the violation has no relevance. Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and the writ appeal is dismissed. ``` Sd/- ``` ``` A.J.DESAI ``` ``` CHIEF JUSTICE ``` ``` Sd/- ``` ``` V.G.ARUN JUDGE ``` uu ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -16- ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WA 195/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1TRUE COPY OF THE GO(P) NO. 377/2016/RD DATED 29.06.2016 Annexure IITRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 25.01.2020. Exhibit P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 10.08.2020 Exhibit P1(a)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO 2ND PETITIONER DATED 07.05.2019 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO 2ND PETITIONER DATED 07.05.2019 Exhibit P1(b)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 12.08.2020 Exhibit P1(c)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER DATED 22.10.2019 Exhibit P1(d)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 5TH PETITIONER DATED 11.08.2020 Exhibit P1(e)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 6TH PETITIONER DATED 17.02.2020 Exhibit P1(f)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER DATED 16.06.2020 Exhibit P1(g)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 8TH PETITIONER DATED 09.06.2020 Exhibit P1(h)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 9TH PETITIONER DATED 17.07.2019 Exhibit P1(i)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 10TH PETITIONER DATED 11.08.2020 Exhibit P1(j)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 11TH PETITIONER FOR 0.40 ARES OF PROPERTY DATED 11.08.2020 Exhibit P1(k)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 11TH PETITIONER TO 0.81 ARES OF PROPERTY DATED 11.08.2020 Exhibit P1(l)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 12TH PETITIONER DATED 11.08.2020 Exhibit P1(m)THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED ``` ``` THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 12TH PETITIONER DATED 11.08.2020 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 13TH PETITIONER DATED 11.08.2020 ``` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -17- ``` ``` Exhibit P1(n) ``` - `Exhibit P1(n) THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE 14THPETITIONER DATED 11.08.2020` - `Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MAP SHOWING THE BYPASS, MINI BYPASS AND EXISTING NH 66` - `Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY PUTHIYATHERU ACTION COMMITTEE DATED NIL` - `Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NUMBERED AS GOP NO.21/2019/RD DATED 14.03.2019` - `Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT PREPARED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE FAIR COMPENSATION ACT DATED 'NIL'` - `Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXPERT GROUP DATED 18.03.2020` - `Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.159/2020/REV DATED 18.06.2020` - `Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 29.07.2019` - `Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 01.02.2021` - `Exhibit P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.08.2021 IN WP(C). NO. 18887 OF 2020` - `Exhibit P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 25-08-2021` - `Exhibit P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 06.09.2021 PRODUCING THE DOCUMENTS RELIED ON THE OBJECTIONS` - `Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) NO. 1926 OF 2021 DATED 29.11.2021` - `Exhibit P14(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021` - `Exhibit P14(b) THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 2ND` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` -18- ``` ``` PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit P14(c)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 3RD PETITIONER DATED 22-12-2021 Exhibit P14(d)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 4TH PETITIONER DATED 22-12-2021 Exhibit P14(e)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 5TH PETITIONER DATED 22-12-2021 Exhibit P14(f)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 6TH PETITIONER DATED 22-12-2021 Exhibit P14(g)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 7TH PETITIONER DATED 22-12-2021 Exhibit P14(h)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 8TH PETITIONER DATED 22-12-2021 Exhibit P14(i)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 9TH PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit P14(j)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 10TH PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit P14(k)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 11TH PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit P14(l)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 12TH PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit P14(m)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 13TH PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit P14(n)THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 14TH PETITIONER DATED 22.12.2021 Exhibit R4(A)A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 18887/2020 DATED 10.08.2021 Exhibit R4(B)TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ``` ``` WA NO. 195 OF 2024 ``` ``` DISTRICT COLLECTOR ON 22.12.2021 Exhibit R4(C)TRUE COPY OF THE ALIGNMENT DRAWING OF PROPOSED MINI BYPASS Exhibit R4(D)TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR Exhibit R4(E)TRUE COPY OF THE TYPICAL CROSS SECTION Exhibit R4(F)TRUE COPY OF THE ALIGNMENT DRAWING OF NH66 Exhibit R4(G)TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT PRODUCED BY THE EXPERT GROUP COMMITTEE Exhibit R4(H)TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 14- 6-2019 Exhibit R4(I)TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 05- 2-2021 Exhibit P15THE TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REPLY(RELEVANT PORTION)RECEIVED FROM THE 9TH RESPONDENT ```