ROSHANBI AZIZ MOTIWALA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned Counsel for the Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, heard finally.

(2.) This is a batch of Writ Petitions that involve a singular and common question of law ' whether, and how, the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ('2013 Act') would apply to determination of compensation, provision of rehabilitation and resettlement and making available infrastructure amenities in cases of land acquisition under the National Highways Act, 1956 ('NH Act').

(3.) The case of the Petitioners is that while the law is clear that the entitlements to rehabilitation and resettlement under the Second Schedule of the 2013 Act would be available over and above the monetary compensation under the First Schedule of the 2013 Act even to cases of land acquisition under the NH Act, their grievance is that their requests for entitlements under the Second Schedule have been rejected in a mechanical manner, purporting to reply on a Manual of Guidelines, instead of an objective application of the substantive provisions of the relevant schedules of the 2013 Act to the facts relating to the Petitioners requests.