MAHENDER Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners claim that their land described in para 3 of the writ petition has been compulsorily acquired by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred by the National Highways Act, 1956, (in short '1956 Act ') vide an award passed by the competent authority on 23/1/2015. It is claimed that 30% solatium on the market value of the land acquired determined by the competent authority has been paid. They claim that since the award has been passed after the enforcement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, therefore, the competent authority has erred in directing payment of 30% solatium in place of one hundred percent. They also claim that the Arbitrator while deciding cases filed by other identically situated owners, has already directed payment of one hundred percent solatium vide award dtd. 20/10/2018.

(2.) Sh. Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate, has filed a brief note in response to the writ petition, which is taken on record.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the acquiring authority is required to pay one hundred percent solatium amount on the market value determined by the competent authority or Land Acquisition Collector as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short 'RFCTLARR Act') which has been made applicable to the acquisitions made under the National Highways Act, 1956, (in short 'the 1956 Act') with respect to assessment of the market value and payment of statutory benefits including solatium and interest on the awards passed by the competent authority under the later Act on or after 1/1/2015. It is also not disputed that certain identically situated owners, who had sought re-determination of the compensation before the Arbitrator, have been paid one hundred percent solatium amount as per the 2013 Act.