Madras High Court
V.R.Arunachalam vs Union Of India on 19 April, 2023
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.04.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
1. V.R.Arunachalam
2. K.Jaganathan
3. K.Sengoda Gounder .. Petitioners
vs
1. Union of India
rep. by Secretary to Government
Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport
and Highways
Shastri Bhavan, R.P.Road, New Delhi.
2. The Competent Authority
Special District Revenue Officer
(LA), National Highways 7
Collectorate, Namakkal. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Declaration, declaring Section 3(A) of the
National Highways Act, 1956 as discriminatory, ulta vies and
unconstitutional.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.V.Vijayakumar
for Mr.T.R.Rajaraman
For Respondents : Mr.J.Madanagopal Rao
Senior Panel Counsel
for R1
Mr.T.Arun Kumar
Additional Government Pleader
for R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 5
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to declare
Section 3(J) of the National Highways Act, 1956 as discriminatory, ultra
vires and unconstitutional.
2. The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing on behalf of the
first respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the issues raised in
the present writ petition are no more res integra and the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in Union of India & Anr. Vs Tarsem Singh & Ors.
[2019 9 SCC 304] declared Section 3(J) of the National Highways Act as
ultra vires and unconstitutional. Paragraph 52 of the judgment cited supra
reads as under:
"52.There is no doubt that the learned
Solicitor General, in the aforesaid two orders, has
conceded the issue raised in these cases. This assumes
importance in view of the plea of Shri Divan that the
impugned judgments should be set aside on the ground
that when the arbitral awards did not provide for
solatium or interest, no Section 34 petition having
been filed by the landowners on this score, the
Division Bench judgments that are impugned before us
ought not to have allowed solatium and/or interest.
Ordinarily, we would have acceded to this plea, but
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
given the fact that the Government itself is of the view
that solatium and interest should be granted even in
cases that arise between 1997 and 2015, in the interest
of justice we decline to interfere with such orders,
given our discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136
of the Constitution of India. We therefore, declare that
the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act relating to
solatium and interest contained in Sections 23(1-1)
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 3-J is, to this extent, violative of Article 14 of
the Constitution of India and, therefore, declared to be
unconstitutional. Accordingly, appeal arising out of
SLP (C) No.9599 of 2019 is dismissed."
3. In view of the facts and circumstances, this writ petition
stands allowed. There will be no order as to costs.
Index : Yes/No 19.04.2023
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
drm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
To:
1. The Secretary to Government
Union of India
Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport
and Highways
Shastri Bhavan, R.P.Road, New Delhi.
2. The Competent Authority
Special District Revenue Officer
(LA), National Highways 7
Collectorate, Namakkal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
drm
W.P.No.8408 of 2008
19.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
