HIGH COURT OF KERALA
T. R. Ravi, J
SUDHEER KUMAR V.V. – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 5944 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 7775 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 7978 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 8939 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 12030 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 17221 OF 2021 | WP(C) NO. 2259 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 14056 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 15009 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 19257 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 22865 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 29886 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 30126 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 30766 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 31730 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 32197 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 34845 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 35020 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 36709 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 37012 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 38168 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 39952 OF 2022 | WP(C) NO. 41889 OF 2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legal background on land acquisition (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented by parties (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. questions arising from the case (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. historical legal framework on acquisition (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. judicial precedents on compensation (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. importance of just compensation (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. impact of legislative changes on land acquisition (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 8. rights of landowners under acquisition laws (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 9. evaluating compensation claims (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 10. analyses of compensation frameworks (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 11. effect of incomplete acquisitions on rights (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 12. judicial findings on relief measures (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 13. final decisions on compensation procedures (Para 39 , 40) |
| 14. court's authority over acquisition processes (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 15. conclusion and directive resolutions (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51) |
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 .
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 -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 whe
The State of WB vs Bela Banerjee and Ors
P.Vajravelu Mudaliar v. Special Deputy Collector for Land Acquisition West Madras
Nagpur Improvement Trust & Anr. Vs. Vithal Rao & Ors.
State of Mysore and Ors. vs. K. C Adiga and Ors
Bishambhar Dayal Chandra Mohan & Ors. vs State of UP.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.