Authorities must provide solatium and additional market value under the National Highways Act as determined by the Supreme Court.

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the Respondents to pay Solatium at 30% and Additional Market Value at

12% on the enhanced compensation amount as re-determined by the 1st respondent in the Award dated 01.08.2017,vide Na.Ka.7201/2012/Case No. 41/2011/Arbitration, along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year and 15% per annum for the subsequent years, from the date of taking possession till the date of realization, in respect of the Petitioner's acquired land situated in S.No.22/3-7, as per subdivision, S.No. 22/3-7B, Andagalur Village, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District, in accordance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India V. Tarsem Singh , by duly considering the Petitioner's representation dated 05.05.2025,within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's lands were acquired by the 2^nd respondent for the purpose of widening four-lane road in National High Way No.7, under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 . Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent passed an Award dated 04.02.2008 determing the compensation for the acquired land. Since the amount of compensation was less than the prevailed market rate, the petitioner had filed a petition before the 1^st respondent seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation and the said Authority, by Award dated 01.08.2017, enhanced the amount of compensation. However, failed to award 30% Solatium and 12% Additional Market Value on the enhanced compensation at that time. Further, he would submit that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh and others reported in (2019) 9 SCC 304 has categorically held that the Authorities are liable to pay Solatium and interest contained in Section 23 (1A) and (2) and interest under Section 28 of the lands acquired under and struck down Section 3 of the said Act. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for solatium, additional market value and interest. In this regard, he made a representation to the respondents on 05.05.2025. As the same did not evoke any response, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the aforesaid relief.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent would submit that the 3^rd respondent will consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner, within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.

4. Heard both sides. Perused the records.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions made, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the 3rd respondent to pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 05.05.2025, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.