JUDGEMENT
SURYA KANT,J. -
(1.)The instant Miscellaneous Application, filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) through its Project Director,
seeks clarification regarding the judgment dtd. 19/9/2019,
passed in Civil Appeal No. 7064 of 2019, titled Union of India &
Anr. v. Tarsem Singh & Ors,Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2019) 9 SCC 304 to the extent that the
aforementioned judgment is to be applied prospectively, thereby
precluding the reopening of cases where land acquisition
proceedings have already been completed and the determination of
compensation had also attained finality.
(2.)This Miscellaneous Application is tagged with several appeals filed by the NHAI challenging the decisions of various High Courts at the
instance of private parties, wherein relief has been granted relying
on the judgment dtd. 19/9/2019. The High Courts vide these
decisions have either (i) awarded 'solatium' and 'interest' to the
expropriated landowners; or (ii) directed the Competent Authority
(Land Acquisition, National Highways) to consider and decide
representations made by the landowners for the grant of 'solatium'
and 'interest' in light of the aforementioned judgment of this Court.
This also includes SLP (C) No. 14942/2019 titled 'K. Raju and
others v. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India
and others', which has been preferred by a private party assailing
the decision of the Madras High Court dtd. 1/4/2019, whereby
the relief of 'solatium' and 'interest' was directed to be raised before
the Competent Authority.
(3.)Additionally, SLP (C) Diary No. 52538/2023 titled 'Raj Kumar and another v. Union of India and others', has been preferred by a private
party whose lands were acquired by NHAI. In this instance, the
Punjab and Haryana High Court has rejected their claim for the
award of 'Additional Market Value' relying upon its decision in
National Highway Authority of India v. Resham Singh,(National Highway Authority of India v. Resham Singh, 2023:PHHC:053158-DB) whereby the landowners were held entitled to 'solatium' and
'interest', but their claim for the grant of 'Additional Market Value'
was declined. These benefits were granted / partly declined in
terms of Ss. 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(1894 Act), which were read into the provisions of the National
Highways Act, 1956 (NHAI Act).
A. BRIEF LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.