IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

222-U Date of Decision:19.05.2026 JASDEEP SINGH ......Petitioner Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Manoj Pundir, Advocate and Mr. Digvijay Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vibhor Bansal, Sr. Panel Counsel, UOI for respondent No.1.

Mr. B.S. Sudan, Advocate for the respondent/NHAI.

Mr. Karunesh Kaushal, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.

****

HHAARRKKEESSHH MMAANNUUJJAA,, JJ.. ((OOrraall))

[1]. By way of present writ petition, prayer has been made for issuance of directions to respondent nos.3 to 5 to release the benefit of 100% solatium in favour of the petitioner/landowner in terms of speaking order dated 25.01.2024 passed by respondent No.5. The operative part therefrom is extracted hereunder:-

“5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and NHAI and also perused relevant records on the file and observed that compensation in respect of land belonging to applicant was assessed and determined. vide Award dated 10.10.2014. However, in this case compensation amount was not paid by the stipulated/appointed date Le. 31.12.2014 as it was released by NHAI thereafter, which fact is abundantly evident from the account statement itself. Thus, in view of letter dated 03.02.2016 and guidelines dated 28.12.2017, issued by the Ministry of Roads Transport and Highways/NHAI, applicant is found entitled for compensation in accordance with the First Schedule of the the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act No.30 of 2013, Solatium at the rate of 100% and interest. Accordingly, NHAI is directed to deposit the amount as reflected in the calculation sheet annexed herewith so that payment could be made to present applicant. The amount of Solatium at the rate of 30% already paid to present applicant, shall be adjusted/deducted, as per rules.

NHAI through its Project Director PIU Amritsar is directed to provide adequate funds so that the compensation amount could be disbursed to the present applicant.”

[2]. Learned counsel for the respondent-NHAI submits that the payment in terms of award dated 10.10.2014 was released to the petitioner-landowner only on 27.05.2015 and 07.08.2015. He further submits that the speaking order dated 25.01.2024 qua the 100% solatium passed by respondent No.5 being a supplementary award, the same has been challenged before the learned Arbitrator vide MA No.400 of 2024 which is pending consideration.

[4]. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, once the payment was released in favour of the petitioner-landowner after 01.01.2015, the amount towards 100% solatium payable to the petitioner-landowner ought to have been released under clause 4.6(iii)(b) of the guidelines dated 28.12.2017 issued by Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Government of India which were further approved, endorsed and relied upon by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide orders dated 23.09.2022 and 01.12.2025 passed in the case of Sanwarmal Singhaniya Memorial Trust & Anr. Vs. National Highways Authority of India (Misc.

Application No.1172 of 2021) and (Misc. Application Diary No.45267/2023).

[5]. Moreover, similar issue with respect to the payment of 100% solatium stands decided by this Court vide order dated 06.04.2026 passed in CCWWPP NNoo..66225555 of 2024 titled ‘Sukhdev Singh Vs. Union of India and others’ wherein land forming part of District Sangrur was acquired and the Award under Section 11 was passed on 20.10.2014; however compensation amount with respect to the acquired land was released to the landowner only after 01.01.2015. Relevant portion from paragraph nos.9 of the said judgment is extracted hereunder:-

“[9]. From the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.2-NHAI (in CWP- 6255-2024), it is evident that after passing of the award by CALA on 20.10.2014, the compensation amounting to Rs.154,86,14,840/- was deposited by NHAI with CALA on 24.12.2014. However, there is no p