SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1372

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, D.N.RAY
Khengarbhai Visabhai Chavda – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Kruti M. Shah.

ORDER :

SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ.

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners would state that the petitioners want to maintain the writ petition in so far as the challenge to the validity of the provisions of Sections 3G(5) and 3G(6) of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT , 1956 being unconstitutional.

2. In so far as the challenge to Section 3J of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT , the issue raised in the present set of writ petitions filed in the year 2017 are about the validity of Section 3J of the NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT ,1956, which has been held unconstitutional by the Apex Court in the case of Union of India and another vs. Tarsem Singh and others, (2019) 9 SCC 304 . The Apex Court while holding Section 3J as ultra vires, made the following observations:-

“11. Before embarking on a discussion as to the constitutional validity of the Amendment Act, it is important to first understand what is meant by the expression “solatium”. In Sunder v. Union of India [Sunder v. Union of India, (2001) 7 SCC 211] , a Bench of five Judges of this Court laid down the nature of solatium as follows : (SCC p. 229, paras 21 and 22)

“21. It is apposite in this context to point out that during the enquiry contemplat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top