ETTI GOUNDER Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short point involved in this batch of 69 petitions concerns the entitlement of the petitioners to solatium and interest on the compensation paid to them for the acquisition of their lands under the provisions of National Highways Act (henceforth would be referred to as the Act). A Note on Legislative History:

(2.) A travel through the lane of legislative history may help capturing the setting in which the petitioners rest their cause for the present action. On 24/1/1997, the President of India promulgated the National Highways Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 1997 by which Ss. 3-A to 3-J were inserted into the National Highways Act, 1956. These provisions provide for a mechanism for speedy acquisition of land for the construction of national highways and also for a speedier resolution of disputes relating to determination of compensation through a mechanism of statutory arbitration as contemplated in Sec. 3-G of the Act. Sec.3-G (7) of the Act sets out the relevant criteria which the arbitrator must take into account in determining the compensation under the Act. Sec. 3G(7) roughly corresponds to Sec. 23(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Sec. 3-J, which, as would be seen has become the epicentre of the present lis, specifically declared that nothing in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, would apply to an acquisition under the National Highways Act, 1956. As Sec. 3G(7) imported only the elements of Sec. 23(1) of the L.A Act for determination of compensation, Sec. 3-J had the effect of excluding the benefit of the additional compensation under Sec. 23 (2) statutorily computed at 30% of the market value (commonly known as 'solatium', and hence would be referred to as such in this order) and interest under Sec. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. The ordinance was replaced by the National Highways Laws (Amendment) Act, 1997 (Act 16 of 1997). This position continued till 1/1/2015 when the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 made solatium and interest payable for acquisitions under the National Highways Act as well (vide Sec. 105). To complete the narration, recently in Project Director, NHAI Vs Hakkim [2021 Scc Online 473], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has travelled far enough to hold that the entire amendment introduced in 1997 to the National Highways Act is discriminatory, but stopped short of declaring it as unconstitutional as its vires was not challenged before it. The legislative history concludes here. Sec.3-J and Constitutionality - The Journey: