Case Note & Summary
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14 – Article 300A – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – National Highways Act, 1956 – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
Held: The Supreme Court dismissed the application filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), seeking clarification that the judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh [(2019) 9 SCC 304] should be applied prospectively. The Court reiterated that denying solatium and interest to landowners whose lands were acquired between 1997 and 2015 would be discriminatory and violative of Article 14. It further held that the financial burden argument by NHAI was not a valid justification for prospective application. The Court directed authorities to ensure parity in compensation by granting solatium and interest to all affected landowners. (Paras 16-26)
Acts and Sections Discussed: Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14, Article 300A Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 23(2), Section 28 National Highways Act, 1956 – Section 3J Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Subjects:Land Acquisition – Solatium – Interest – Retrospective Effect – Compensation – NHAI – Doctrine of Immutability – Article 14 – Judicial Review – Public Exchequer – Statutory Benefits
Issue of Consideration: Union of India and another Versus Tarsem Singh and others
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
