Scribd
Upload
6 views

section 3a NH Act

The Supreme Court struck down Section 3J of the National Highways Act, ruling it unconstitutional for violating Article 14 of the Constitution by denying solatium and interest to landowners, which is available under the Land Acquisition Act. The Punjab and Haryana High Court also found Sections 3J and 3G of the Act to be arbitrary and irrational, affirming that landowners are entitled to solatium and interest when their land is acquired. The court upheld that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act regarding compensation apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act.

Uploaded by

srinidhirapolu3
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
6 views

section 3a NH Act

The Supreme Court struck down Section 3J of the National Highways Act, ruling it unconstitutional for violating Article 14 of the Constitution by denying solatium and interest to landowners, which is available under the Land Acquisition Act. The Punjab and Haryana High Court also found Sections 3J and 3G of the Act to be arbitrary and irrational, affirming that landowners are entitled to solatium and interest when their land is acquired. The court upheld that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act regarding compensation apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act.

Uploaded by

srinidhirapolu3
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Constitutional validity of section 3a of the National Highways Act

Union of India & Anr. Vs. Tarsem Singh & Ors. (2019) SCC 9 304
Facts: A batch of appeals by the Union of India challenged the view of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court that the non-grant of solatium and interest to lands acquired under the
National Highways Act, which is available if lands are acquired under the Land Acquisition
Act, is bad in law. The facts of one of these appeals were taken up as illustrative of the points
for consideration in all these appeals. On 11th July 2005, the said lands were declared to have
vested in the State pursuant to Section 3D(2) of the said Act. Meanwhile, a Section 34
application filed under the Arbitration Act by the Union of India was dismissed on the ground
that it was hopelessly time-barred. However, the Court deleted the grant of severance and
18% interest if the awarded amount is not paid within six months, following an earlier
Division Bench judgment of the same Court.

Issue: Whether Section 3J of the NH Act, whereby the application of Land Acquisition Act,
1894 has been excluded for acquisitions under NH Act, is discriminatory in nature and thus
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India?

Judgement: The Hon’ble Apex Court on 19th September 2019, in its landmark judgment has
struck down Section 3J of the National Highways Act, 1956 upholding the view taken by the
Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in M/s Golden Iron holding that the statutory
benefits of solatium and interest permissible under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would also
be granted to the beneficiaries under the NH Act. The Court further held that the exclusion of
Section 25 of the Land Acquisition Act from Section 34 of the Act is unconstitutional but it is
severable and we sever it. The Court concluded that the provision of Section 3J is, to this
extent, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, declared to be
unconstitutional.

Ratio: The Hon'ble Apex Court firstly observed that the object being the amendment of 1997
which was to speed up the object of acquisition for construction of National Highways. The
awarding of solatium and interest has nothing to do with achieving this object. Therefore, the
Court declared that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act relating to solatium and
interest contained in Section 23(1A) and (2) and interest payable in terms of section 28
proviso will apply to acquisitions made under the National Highways Act. Consequently, the
provision of Section 3J is, to this extent, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India
and, therefore, declared to be unconstitutional. Secondly, it was also noted by the Hon'ble
Court that both prior to the amendment of 1997 and after the coming into force of the Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, solatium and interest is payable to
landowners whose property is compulsorily acquired for purposes of National Highways.

M/S. GOLDEN IRON AND STEEL FORGING V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS S
2008 SCC ONLINE P&H 498

Facts: The petitioners challenged the notifications issued and published under Section 3-A(1)
and Section 3-D of the National Highways Act, 1956, acquiring their land for building NH
No. 8 from KM 24000 to KM 42000, including the construction of a Toll Plaza at KM 42000
in Gurgaon District in the State of Haryana. The petitioner's application for change of land
use was granted with respect to 12357 sq. yards. The petitioners claimed that the orders were
cryptic, non-speaking, void, and violated the provisions of Section 3C of the Act. They also
alleged mala fide cause for issuance of the notification and that the site of the Toll Plaza was
changed without justification. They contended that the provisions for acquisition were
arbitrary, irrational, and violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Issues:

1. Whether the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 violated Article 14 of the
Constitution of India?
2. Whether the denial of solatium and interest to landowners whose lands are acquired
under the impugned statute violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India?
3. Whether Section 3H of the Act was arbitrary and unconstitutional?

Judgement: The Hon’ble High court of Punjab & Haryana held that the provisions of
Section 3J and 3G are ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, all acquisitions
made under the National Highway Act, 1956 would necessarily have to grant solatium and
interest, in terms similar to those contained in Section 23(2) and Section 28 of the Land
Acquisition Act.

Ratio: The court held that the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956 violated Article
14 of the Constitution of India as they discriminated between similarly situated landowners.
The court struck down Section 3J and Section 3G of the Act as arbitrary, irrational, and
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, in so far as they denied payment of solatium and
interest. The court held that landowners, who are compulsorily divested of their property
under the impugned statute would henceforth be entitled to solatium and interest as envisaged
by the provisions of Section 23 and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act. The court also
held that Section 3-C(2) of the Act, which confined consideration of objections to the “user”
of the land, was neither arbitrary nor illegal. The court found that the absence of an appellate
forum or the right to file an appeal did not render the statute unconstitutional. The court,
therefore, struck down the impugned provisions and granted landowners the right to solatium
and interest.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy