1. Compensation for acquisition of right of user of land under P&MP Act, 1962 — dispute over applicable compensation regime. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Gau) 1683
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Ashutosh Kumar, C.J., Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
The Gail India Limited - Appellant
Versus
Kaddus Ali, S/O Late Uzir Mahmud Fakir - Respondents
WA 256 of 2026
Decided On : 23-09-2026
Important Points
Compensation for right of user under the P&MP Act, 1962 is determined by assessing market value and solatium via the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, plus 40% additional compensation, while interest is limited to 6% per annum as per the P&MP Act, 1962.
Subject
Land Acquisition - Right of User Compensation
Act Referred
PETROLEUM AND MINERALS PIPELINES ACQUISITION OF RIGHT OF USER IN LAND ACT : S.10, S.10(2), S.10(3), S.11
RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT : S.29, S.30, S.4(2)
RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT : S.29, S.30, S.4(2)
Headnote
(A) Land Acquisition - Right of User - Determination of Market Value - Where the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 does not provide a specific methodology for calculating market value, the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 shall be applied for such assessment. (Para 11, 13)
(B) Compensation Calculation - Solatium and Additional Payment - For acquisition of right of user, the total compensation is determined as the market value (assessed under RFCTLARR Act, 2013) plus an equal amount of solatium, and an additional 40% (comprising 10% statutory compensation and 30% additional concession). (Para 12, 20)
(C) Interest - Applicability - Interest for right of user acquisition is governed by Section 11(2) of the P&MP Act, 1962, providing 6% per annum from the date of deposit due to the date of actual deposit, and not the 12% interest provided under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, as the latter requires a Social Impact Assessment Study not applicable here. (Para 17, 18, 21)
Issues: Whether the compensation for the acquisition of the right of user of land under the P&MP Act, 1962 should be calculated using the methodology and interest rates of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
Result: Appeal disposed of with clarification that market value and solatium follow RFCTLARR Act, 2013, while interest follows P&MP Act, 1962.
(B) Compensation Calculation - Solatium and Additional Payment - For acquisition of right of user, the total compensation is determined as the market value (assessed under RFCTLARR Act, 2013) plus an equal amount of solatium, and an additional 40% (comprising 10% statutory compensation and 30% additional concession). (Para 12, 20)
(C) Interest - Applicability - Interest for right of user acquisition is governed by Section 11(2) of the P&MP Act, 1962, providing 6% per annum from the date of deposit due to the date of actual deposit, and not the 12% interest provided under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, as the latter requires a Social Impact Assessment Study not applicable here. (Para 17, 18, 21)
Issues: Whether the compensation for the acquisition of the right of user of land under the P&MP Act, 1962 should be calculated using the methodology and interest rates of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
Result: Appeal disposed of with clarification that market value and solatium follow RFCTLARR Act, 2013, while interest follows P&MP Act, 1962.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. D. Saikia, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. R. Borpujari and Mr. B. Chowdhury, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. K.N. Choudhury, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Anowar Hussain, Advocate, Ms. N. Bordoloi, Standing Counsel, Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, Additional Senior Government, Advocate
For the Appellant :Mr. D. Saikia, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. R. Borpujari and Mr. B. Chowdhury, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. K.N. Choudhury, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Anowar Hussain, Advocate, Ms. N. Bordoloi, Standing Counsel, Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, Additional Senior Government, Advocate
Table of Contents
2. Appellant argued compensation under P&MP Act, 1962; respondent argued compensation under RFCTLARR Act, 2013. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 )
3. Market value assessed under RFCTLARR Act, 2013; solatium and 40% compensation payable; no 12% interest from Social Impact Study. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 )
4. Compensation for land user under P&MP Act, 1962 includes market value under RFCTLARR Act, solatium, and 40% (10%+30%). (Para 12 , 20 )
5. Appeal disposed off; impugned judgment upheld with clarification on compensation calculation including 6% interest. (Para 22 , 23 )
6. What method determines compensation for acquisition of right of user under the P&MP Act, 1962?
Market value is determined under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, with solatium and an additional 40% (10% + 30%) of that value. (Para 12 , 13 , 20 )
7. Does the 12% interest under Section 30(3) of the RFCTLARR Act apply to acquisitions under the P&MP Act, 1962?
No, because the P&MP Act does not provide for a Social Impact Assessment Study; instead, 6% interest applies under Section 11(2). (Para 17 , 18 , 21 )
8. What is the role of the Supreme Court judgment in State of Tamil Nadu v. GAIL regarding compensation?
It established the practice of paying an additional 30% over the 10% compensation for land user under the P&MP Act, totaling 40%. (Para 12 , 19 )
JUDGMENT :
Ashutosh Kumar, CJ.
We have heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. R. Borpujari and Mr. B. Chowdhury, learned Advocates for the appellants/GAIL India Limited & Anr. and Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Anowar Hossain, learned Advocate for respondent No.1. Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department and Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam are present.
2. In this intra-court appeal, the appellants have mounted challenge to the judgment and order dated 16.06.2026 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No.572/2024, whereby it has been held that for determination of the compensation for acquisition of the right of user of land of respondent No.1 under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (hereinafter to be referred as “P&MP Act, 1962”), compensation would be calculated on the basis of the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short, “RFCTLARR Act, 2013”) by virtue of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2015.
By the afore-noted judgment, the competent authority was directed to determine the compensation in accordance with the provisions of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, particularly, solatium and interest.
3. The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, vide Notification dated 26.12.2018, published on 31.12.2018, acquired the right of user over the land belonging to respondent No.1 under the P&MP Act, 1962, for the purposes of laying the Barauni-Guwahati Gas Pipeline (BGPL) by the appellants/GAIL.
4. Before that, a notice was issued by the competent authority on 09.08.2019, which came to the knowledge of respondent No.1 only on 20.06.2020 and, therefore, he could not participate in the objection proceedings.However, later, a dispute arose whether respondent No.1 would be compensated under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 or the P&MP Act, 1962; which objection was raised by respondent No.1 before the competent authority, seeking a clarification in that regard.
5. The response of the appellants dated 07.08.2020 on this objection of respondent No.1 was that since the right of user acquisition had taken place as per the provisions of P&MP Act, 1962, the compensation would be received under Sections 10 and 11 of the P&MP Act, 1962 and not under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
6. Based on this declaration of the competent authority, respondent No.1 registered a Miscellaneous (L.A.) Case No.16/2020 under Sections 10(2) and 10(3) of the P&MP Act, 1962 before the learned District Judge, Barpeta, wherein all other respondents except the appellants herein refrained from raising any contention.
7. The appellants stated before the competent authority that for the purposes of determination of compensation, the market value of the land would be assessed by adopting the methodology contemplated under the First Schedule of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013. Thereafter, the market value would be multiplied by a factor two for solatium which would be added to the compensation. This would allow the affected land- holder to get compensation at the rate of 10% i.e. 40% of the market value declared by the District Administration. It was also asserted by the appellants/GAIL that this methodology has been adopted in all the projects of the GAIL.
8. The matter travelled to the High Court, wherein before the learned Single Judge, the same stand was taken by the appellants.
9. We are in absolute conformity with the judgment and order impugned in the present appeal.However, we wish to indicate that from a reading of the brief, it gets reflected that there was some confusion amongst the parties with respect to the methodology of calculating the compensation and, therefore, this litigation ensued. The confusion got further
