3 months ago
1
The Supreme Court connected Monday (February 23, 2026) orally observed that pre-2018 onshore acquisition cases cannot beryllium reopened for the assistance of compensation with involvement to the farmers whose onshore had been acquired nether the NHAI Act.
The reflection was made by a peculiar Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan portion commencing the proceeding successful an unfastened tribunal of a plea of the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), seeking a reappraisal of a 2019 verdict of the apical court.
The apex court, successful 2019, held that the determination to assistance compensation with involvement to farmers whose onshore was acquired nether the NHAI Act would use retrospectively.
The NHAI, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, said the 2019 judgement imposed a immense fiscal load (approximately ₹32,000 crore) and should lone use prospectively.
The Bench had antecedently rejected this, noting that denying specified benefits violated Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
“What possibly weighed with your lordship was that it was ₹100 crore," Mr. Mehta said, adding that successful different judgement, the apical tribunal said that nary disposed of cases volition beryllium reopened.
“The cut-off day appears to beryllium 2008, provided claims were live then. Pre-2018 matters cannot beryllium reopened. Those matters which were pending successful 2008 continue. If idiosyncratic successful the aboriginal 2020s filed an exertion saying they are entitled to parity connected the ground of 2008, we tin accidental yes arsenic the solatium but not interest, similar successful onshore acquisition matters,” the CJI observed.
The Bench heard the little arguments and asked the parties to record written submissions, if any, and listed the reappraisal plea for proceeding aft 2 weeks.
On November 4 past year, the CJI-led Bench had agreed to perceive successful unfastened tribunal the plea of the NHAI seeking reappraisal of its verdict.
The Bench had issued a announcement connected the reappraisal plea and listed the substance for unfastened tribunal proceeding connected November 11, 2025.
The Solicitor General had told the Bench that the substance would person wide implications of astir ₹32,000 crore, and not ₹100 crore arsenic was stated earlier successful the petition.
On February 4, 2025, the apical court, portion rejecting NHAI's plea, had ruled that its 2019 determination allowing the assistance of compensation and involvement to farmers, whose onshore was acquired nether the NHAI Act, would use retrospectively.
The NHAI had sought the applicability of its September 19, 2019 judgement prospectively, consequently precluding the reopening of cases wherever onshore acquisition proceedings had already been completed and the determination of compensation attained finality.
The Bench had said, "We find nary merit successful the contentions raised by the applicant, NHAI. We reaffirm the principles established successful Tarsem Singh [2019 decision] regarding the beneficial quality of granting 'solatium' and 'interest' portion emphasising the request to debar creating unjust classifications lacking intelligible differentia. Consequently, we deem it due to disregard the contiguous miscellaneous application."
The apical tribunal had said successful its 2019 determination that Section 3J of the NHAI Act, by excluding the applicability of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 and consequently denying solatium and involvement for lands acquired nether the NHAI Act, was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
"Regardless, the supplication successful the instant exertion expressly seeks clarification that the determination successful Tarsem Singh should beryllium deemed to run prospectively only.
"However, successful our considered view, granting specified a clarification would efficaciously nullify the precise alleviation that Tarsem Singh intended to provide, arsenic the prospective cognition of it would reconstruct the authorities of affairs to the aforesaid presumption arsenic it was earlier the determination was rendered," the Bench had said.
Referring to the 2019 decision, which held Section 3J of the NHAI Act arsenic unconstitutional, the apical tribunal had said the broader intent down the Tarsem Singh verdict was to resoluteness and enactment quietus upon the quagmire created by Section 3J of the NHAI Act, which led to the unequal attraction of similarly-situated persons.
"The interaction of Section 3J was short-lived, owing to the applicability of the 2013 Act upon the NHAI Act from January 1, 2015. As a result, 2 classes of landowners emerged, devoid of immoderate intelligible differentia: those whose lands were acquired by the NHAI betwixt 1997 and 2015, and those whose lands were acquired otherwise," it had said.
It besides said that the 2019 verdict indispensable beryllium viewed successful the airy of the rule that erstwhile a proviso is declared unconstitutional, immoderate continued disparity strikes astatine the halfway of Article 14 of the Constitution and indispensable beryllium rectified, peculiarly erstwhile specified disparity affects lone a prime group.
The apical tribunal had clarified that the eventual result of its 2019 determination was constricted to granting solatium and involvement to the aggrieved landowners whose lands were acquired by the NHAI betwixt 1997 and 2015, and it did not, successful immoderate manner, nonstop the reopening of cases that had already attained finality.
