The court ruled that additional compensation under Section 30(3) must be calculated on the total market value, including multiplication factors, and interest under Section 80 applies to unpaid amounts.

JUDGMENT :

SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ.

Heard Mr. A.J.Yagnik, the learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Sanjay UDhwani, the learned AGP appearing for the State respondent No.1, Mr. Maulik G. Nanavati, the learned advocate for the respondent No.2 and Mr.Pradip D. Bhate, the learned advocate for the respondent No.3.

2. In the present writ petition, the petitioners are seeking for the benefits of statutory benefits of additional compensation @ 12% on the market value of the land provided under Section 30(3) of the RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT , 2013 (in short as ‘the 2013 Act') for the period commending from the date of the preliminary notification published under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956, till the date of the award or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier, as per the scheme of the said provision.

3. The petitioners would submit that though while making determination of the market value in accordance with Section 26 of the 2013 Act, multiplication Factor-2 was applied with respect to the land-in-question under the award, however, the benefits of the additional compensation as payable under Section 30(3) of the Act, 2013 on the total amount of the market value (including multiplication Factor-2) has not been awarded to the petitioners. The further prayer made in the writ petition is to award interest under Section 80 of the Act, 2013 on the unpaid amount, which was required to be included in the impugned award.

4. The petitioners would also pray for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of Schedule-II with regard to re-habilitation and re-settlement under the 2013 Act in light of the directives and guidelines issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, appended as Annexure-'A' to the writ petition. The further prayer is to extend the benefits of Schedule-III with regard to infrastructural amenities, based on the notification dated 28.08.2015 issued by the Government of India, whereby the First, Second and Third Schedule of the 2013 Act have been made applicable with respect to the acquisition made under the enactments enumerated in the Fourth Schedule of the 2013, Act.

5. It is contended by Mr. A.J.Yagnik, the learned counsel for the petitioners that the National Highways Act, 1956 is one of the enactments enumerated in the Fourth Schedule to the 2013 Act. The result is that by virtue of the notification dated 28.08.2015 issued by the Central Government of India, which was given due attention by the Apex Court in the case ofUnion of India and Another v/s. Tarsem Singh and Others [ (2019) 9 SCC 304 ] and received approval in the case ofNHAI v/s. P. Nagaraju [ (2022) 15 SCC 1 ], the petitioners are entitled for all the statutory benefits of 2013 Act including the additional compensation payable under Section 30(3) of the Act, 2013.

6. Taking note of all these submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, at the outset, we may say that the awards in the writ petition have been rendered sometime in the year 2021. All the petitioners herein have approached this Court for the first time in the writ petition filed in the end of December, 2025, agitating the issue of denial of interest under Section 30(3) and the benefits of Second and Third Schedule of the 2013 Act.

7. As regards the benefits under Section 30(3) of the 2013 Act, this Court has awarded the said benefits to the petitioners in the Special Civil Application No. 7561 of 20