1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. By this petition the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs. :
A. Issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to shift underpass as originally proposed and to be constructed at N.H.A.I Chainage KM 445 + 300 to KM 445 + 400.
(B) Issue further writ, order, or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to furnish complete information and situation in regard to acquisition of land of the petitioners over Arazi Field Nos. 2312 and 2313 alongwith its boundaries.
(c) Cost of the petition.
(d) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Petitioner''s case is that six laning of National Highway is underway by National Highway Authority of India. The petitioners sought certain information under Right to Information Act. The petitioner himself has annexed a copy of the letter dated 4th October, 2013 by which information as required by letter dated 29th July, 2013 were given to the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that according to the site plans, which were given to the petitioners, underpasses were little away from the petitioner''s premises. However, the site plans have been revised without giving information to the petitioner. The petitioners in the writ petition does not challenge any of the acquisition made on behalf of National Highway Authority.
4. The petitioner''s seek mandamus commanding the respondents not to shift the underpasses as originally proposed to be constructed by National Highway Authority. The petitioners were informed by letter (Annexure-8) that plans are subject to some change as per site plans.
5. National Highway Authority has right to prepare site plans, they have also right to carry on any change. The petitioners in so far as acquisition of land is concerned, they have right to challenge such acquisition in accordance with law.
6. We do not find any substance in the submission that the petitioners should have been informed about any change in the site plan. It is open for the petitioners to seek further information regarding change of site plans as per Right to Information Act, 2005. It is in the domain of national authority to carry out six laning of the Highway and providing of different facilities. It is the expert body, who has to carry out its project. It is not for this Court to adjudicate the issues of fact regarding shifting of underpasses. It is in the domain of the authority, who is an expert body to carry out the project.
7. The relief as claimed by the petitioners cannot be granted. The writ petition is dismissed.
