UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus TARSEM SINGH & ORS.

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus TARSEM SINGH & ORS.

Solatium and interest are integral to compensation for compulsory acquisition of land, and Sections 3A, 3G(7), and 3J of the National Highways Act, 1956 as amended cannot deny these on grounds of Article 31-C, as the Amendment Act does not have a rational nexus with Directive Principles and its objects are not served by removing solatium and interest. Any classification denying solatium and interest to landowners under the National Highways Act as against other land acquisition enactments violates Article 14 and is unconstitutional.

Parties
Appellant: Union of India; Respondent: Tarsem Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Disposition
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Solatium and Interest, Protection Under Article 31 C, Classification Under Article 14
Constitutional Law Land Acquisition Administrative Law Compulsory Acquisition Solatium and Interest Protection Under Article 31 C Classification Under Article 14

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Union of India

Appellant

Tarsem Singh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether award of solatium is permissible under the National Highways Act, 1956 as amended by National Highways Laws (Amendment) Act, 1997
  2. 2 Whether the Amendment Act, 1997 is protected by Article 31-C of the Constitution
  3. 3 Whether classification between landowners under National Highways Act and other acquisition Acts violates Article 14

Ratio Decidendi

Solatium and interest are integral to compensation for compulsory acquisition of land, and Sections 3A, 3G(7), and 3J of the National Highways Act, 1956 as amended cannot deny these on grounds of Article 31-C, as the Amendment Act does not have a rational nexus with Directive Principles and its objects are not served by removing solatium and interest. Any classification denying solatium and interest to landowners under the National Highways Act as against other land acquisition enactments violates Article 14 and is unconstitutional.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Provisions of the Land Acquisition Act relating to solatium and interest contained in Section 23 (1A) and (2) and interest payable in terms of proviso to Section 28 will apply to acquisitions under National Highways Act.
  • Section 3J to this extent is violative of Article 14 and hence unconstitutional.