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

2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17590

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
T. R. Ravi, J
NALINI E – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) 19257/2022



Advocates:
SRI B.KRISHNAN, SHRI.R.PARTHASARATHY, SMT.SEEMA, SRI MATHEWS K.PHILIP, SRI T.C.KRISHNA, SRI B.G.BIDAN CHANDRAN, SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, SRI SHYAM PADMAN, SRI.RAZAK M., SRI.C.M.ANDREWS, SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR, KUM.LAYA MARY JOSEPH, SRI.HARISH ABRAHAM, SRI P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH, SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR, SHRI.ABDUL RASAK A., SHRI.MUNAS K.P, SHRI.ASWIN KUMAR M J, SMT.HELEN P.A., SRI.ARUN ROY, SRI.SHAHIR SHOWKATH ALI, SRI V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN, SRI E.C.KURIAKOSE, SRI K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN, SRI M.KIRANLAL, SRI MANU RAMACHANDRAN, SRI R.RAJESH (VARKALA), SRI SAMEER M NAIR, MS.GEETHU KRISHNAN, MS.SAILAKSHMI MENON, SRI P.SATHISAN, MS.DONA AUGUSTINE

Section 94 of the 2013 Act applies to acquisitions under the NH Act, allowing landowners to demand full acquisition and ensuring comprehensive compensation, including rehabilitation and resettlement.

Headnote:(A) National Highways Act, 1956 - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 94 - Applicability of Section 94 of the 2013 Act to acquisitions under the NH Act - Petitioners challenged partial acquisition of land, claiming right to full acquisition under Section 94 - Court held that Section 94 applies to NH Act acquisitions, allowing landowners to demand full acquisition if desired. (Paras 4, 6, 36)

(B) Compensation - Definition and determination - Compensation must include not just market value but also rehabilitation and resettlement costs - The right to compensation is a constitutional right, and the principles of compensation must be uniformly applied regardless of the enactment under which land is acquired. (Paras 10, 21, 25)

Facts of the case:
The writ petitioners' land was partially acquired for highway expansion, leaving unusable strips. They sought application of Section 94 of the 2013 Act, which allows for full acquisition if desired. (Paras 1, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found that Section 94 of the 2013 Act applies to acquisitions under the NH Act, allowing landowners to request full acquisition and ensuring just compensation. (Paras 36, 51)

Issues: The main issues included whether Section 94 applies to NH Act acquisitions, the nature of compensation, and the rights of landowners regarding partial acquisitions. (Paras 6, 10)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that Section 94 provides a substantive right to landowners to demand full acquisition, and compensation must be comprehensive, including rehabilitation and resettlement. (Paras 36, 51)

Result: Writ petitions allowed; directions issued for consideration of full acquisition requests and compensation. (Paras 51)

Table of Content
1. application of section 94 (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT

“Property is a human right because it is a human’s right.

Walter Barnes in “Third World Ways in Cambridge USA”, The Wall Street Journal, December 1983 The writ petitioners in these cases are persons whose land and buildings had been acquired for the purpose of widening the National Highway under the provisions of the National Highways Act. They are aggrieved since part of their properties and buildings are acquired, leaving out small strips of land or buildings that are unusable. In some cases, awards have been passed and in some, awards are yet to be passed. The common question that arises for consideration in all these writ petitions is whether Section 94 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ('the 2013 Act' for short) will apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act.

History

2. The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 ('the 1894 Act' for short) is a pre-constitutional law that provided for the acquisition of land for public purposes and for companies. The Act provides for payment of compensation to persons who lost their lands due to compulsory acquisition. The exercise of the power of eminent domain to expropriate was statutorily recognised by the enactment. Several amendments have been effected to the 1894 Act to bring it in conformity with the requirement of the Constitution of India. The Legislature thought it fit to exclude the operation of the 1894 Act when it came to acquisition for certain specific purposes for which separate law was enacted, with provisions for acquisition. The National Highways Act, 1956 ('the NH Act' for short), which came into force in 1956, did not originally contain provisions for land acquisition. Acquisition for the purpose of National Highways was made under the 1894 Act, and the owners were given in addition to the market value, solatium as well as interest under the provisions of the said Act. By an amendment brought about by the National Highways Laws (Amendment) Act, 1997, provisions were introduced into the NH Act for empowering acquisition for the purpose of development of highways. Section 49 of the 1894 Act recognised a right for the landowners to express their desire that the whole of a house, manufactory, or building may be acquired instead of a part thereof. The 1997 amendment of the NH Act did not contain a similar provision that safeguards the above-said right of the landowner. Instead, what was available was Section 3-G(7), which deals with the determination of the amount of compensation. The only provision which was almost akin to of the 1894 Act was Section 3-G(7) (b) and (c), which identified the damage sustained by a reason of severing of the land from other land and the damage sustained at the time of taking possession by the reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting other immovable property of the land owner or his earnings, as matters, that have to be taken into account while determining compensation.

3. The entire concept behind acquisition underwent a sea change when the 2013 Act was brought into force. The 2013 Act, which was enacted 120 years after the earlier enactment, has attempted to replace the expropriation legislation by providing for a humane, participative, informed, and transparent process for land acquisition, as the preamble to the new Act suggests. The preamble says that the intention is to acquire land with the least disturbance to the owners and other affected families, provide just and fair compensation to the affected persons, make adequate provisions for their rehabilitation and resettlement, and ensure that the cumulative outcome of the compulsory acquisition should be that the affected persons become partners in development leading to an improvement in their post-acquisition social and economic status. The 2013 Act recognised the special e

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 Back to top