Partly allowed¶58

The Union of India and Ors. v. Smt Kanduri Bala Ray

Gauhati HC12 Jul 2026I.A.(Civil)/1757/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Extension of time; NHAI; solatium 30%; interest 12%; Section 23[1]; Section 23[2]; Land Acquisition Act 1894; National Highways Act 1956; W.P.[C] no. 3496/2025; I.A.(Civil)/1757/2026; National Highways Authority of India vs. Tarsem Singh and others; Civil Appeal no. 7064/2019; Review Petition [Civil] no. 2528/2025; SOP; MoRT&H; deadline 13.09.2026; Gauhati High Court; Manish Choudhury, J.

What did the court decide?

Extension of time granted to the extent indicated: the applicants (the respondent authorities in the NHAI in the accompanying writ petition) may extend the benefits of solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% along with interest accrued thereon within two months from 13.07.2026, i.e., on or before 13.09.2026; the indefinite extension sought was held not tenable. ¶58

The Union of India and Ors. Vs Smt Kanduri Bala Ray — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶58

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants' request for extension of the time period fixed by the Order dated 23.03.2026 — of an indefinite nature, at least until preparation of the Standard Operating Procedure — is tenable. +1 more

¶52

Court's answer

An application seeking an extension of time of indefinite nature — at least until preparation of the SOP — made after a two-month period had already been recorded on 23.03.2026, is not tenable.

¶56

Ratio / Principle

Finding the applicants' counsel's renewed submission that a further period of two months would be reasonable and sufficient, the Court allowed the application to the extent of permitting the NHAI authorities to extend solatium @ 30%, interest @ 12% and accrued interest on or before 13.09.2026.

¶59

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court — Order dated 13-07-2026 (Manish Choudhury, J.) in I.A.(Civil)/1757/2026, filed by the Union of India and NHAI authorities (impleaded as respondent nos. 1, 4, 5 & 6 in the accompanying W.P.[C] no. 3496/2025 brought by twelve landowners) seeking extension of time to comply with the Court's Order dated 23.03.2026, whereby NHAI had undertaken to pay solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% under Section 23[2] and Section 23[1] of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [since repealed], with accrued interest, by 22.05.2026 for lands acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956. The applicants pleaded that, after disposal of Review Petition [Civil] no. 2528/2025 in Miscellaneous Application no. 1773/2021 in Civil Appeal no. 7064/2019 (National Highways Authority of India vs. Tarsem Singh and others) on 25.03.2026, a Standard Operating Procedure was awaited from MoRT&H. Holding an indefinite extension 'not tenable', the Court accepted counsel's renewed submission of two months and directed compliance on or before 13.09.2026.

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010105822026

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1757/2026

¶6

THE UNION OF INDIA and ORS

¶7

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ROAD, TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, TRANSPORT BHAWAN, 1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI110001

¶8

2: THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA INDIA NHAI MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS HQ G- 5 AND 6 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI- 110075

¶9

3: THE GENERAL MANAGER FINANCE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA HQ G- 5 6 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI- 110075

¶10

4: THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA NHI BONGAIGAON P.O. AND DISTRICTBONGAIGAON PIN- 783380 ASSA

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

SMT KANDURI BALA RAY W/O LT. HARKESWAR RAY, R/O VILL- NOWAPARA NO. 1, P.O.NOWAPARA,DIST- BONGAIGAON, PIN-783392, ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

2:SMT SHUKRA WALA RAY

¶15

W/O LT. MONESWAR RAY R/O VILL- NOWAPARA NO. 1 P.O.- NOWAPARA DIST- BONGAIGAON PIN-783392 ASSAM

¶16

3:DURGESWAR RAY

¶17

S/O LT. HARESWAR RAY R/O VILL- NOWAPARA NO. 1 P.O.- NOWAPARA DIST- BONGAIGAON PIN-783392 ASSAM

¶18

4:SUCHOMA BEGUM

¶19

C/O JAFOR ALI R/O VILL- BHATIPARA P.O.- NOWAPARA DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783392 ASSAM

¶20

5:JAKIR HUSSAIN

¶21

S/O LT. HANIF ALI R/O VILL- NAGARJHAR P.O.- DAKSHIN BIJNI DISTBOBGAIGAON PIN-783390

¶22

6:ALI AHMED

¶23

S/O LT. BASHIRUDDIN AHMED R/O VILL- NACHANKURI NO. 1 DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783390 ASSAM

¶24

7:RAMAYAN CHOUHAN

¶25

S/O LT. RAMBRISH CHOUHAN R/O VILL- BALAJAN TINIALI P.O.HALTUGAON DIST- KOKRAJHAR PIN-783370 ASSAM

¶26

8:ASHWANI CHAUHAN ALIAS ASHWINI CHOUHAN

¶27

S/O LT. SUDARSHAN CHAUHAN R/O VILL- MONAKOCHA P.O.- BIJNI DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783390 ASSAM

¶28

9:CHOTALAL CHOUHAN

¶29

S/O BALLA CHOUHAN R/O VILL- MONAKOCHA P.O.- BIJNI DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783390 ASSAM

¶30

10:MAHEN CHANDRA RAY ALIAS MAHEN RAY

¶31

S/O LT. GANGA CHARAN RAY R/O VILL AND P.O.- NOWAPARA NO.1 DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783392 ASSAM

¶32

11:SABETRI BALA ROY ALIAS SOHEBALA ROY

¶33

W/O LT. ROBEN ROY R/O VILL- BARBILA P.O.- MANIKPUR DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783392 ASSAM

¶34

12:ZAKIR HUSSAIN

¶35

S/O LT. APSAR ALI R/O VILL- BHATIPARA P.O.- NOWAPARA NO. 1 DISTBONGAIGAON PIN-783392 ASSAM

¶36

13:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶37

REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE SETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 ASSAM

¶38

Page No.# 3/5

¶39

14:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BONGAIGAON PO AND DIST BONGAIGAON ASSAM 783380

¶40

15:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BIJNI REVENUE CIRCLE BONGAIGAON PO BIJNI DIST BONGAIGAON 783390 ASSA

¶41

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR C BARUAH, SC, NHAI

¶42

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE,MR S C DAS

¶43

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶44

ORDER

¶45

Date : 13-07-2026

¶46

Heard Mr. C. Baruah, learned counsel for the applicants; Ms. D.R. Bongshiary, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 – 12; Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the opposite party no. 13; and Ms. M. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the opposite party nos. 14-15.

¶47

The four applicants herein are impleaded as respondent nos. 1, 4, 5 & 6 in the accompanying writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 3496/2025.

¶48

In the accompanying writ petition, the opposite party nos. 1 -12 herein are the writ petitioners. The writ petition has been filed seeking inter alia a direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent authorities in

¶49

Page No.# 4/5

¶50

the National Highways Authority of India [NHAI] to grant the benefits in the forms of solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% under Section 23[2] and Section 23[1] respectively of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [since repealed], to them as their lands have been acquired under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956.

¶51

In the course of the writ proceedings, the Court, on 23.03.2026, recorded a submission of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent NHAI authorities therein, that is, the applicants herein, to the effect that the respondent authorities in the NHAI would extend the benefit of solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% along with interest accrued thereon on or before 22.05.2026 to the petitioners i.e. the opposite party nos. 1 – 12 herein.

¶52

The instant application is filed by the applicants seeking extension of the time period to abide by the Order dated 23.03.2026.

¶53

Mr. Baruah, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that after disposal of a review petition, Review Petition [Civil] no. 2528/2025 in Miscellaneous Application no. 1773/2021 in Civil Appeal no. 7064/2019 [National Highways Authority of India vs. Tarsem Singh and others] on 25.03.2026, the issue has been taken up by the NHAI with the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways [MoRT&H], Government of India and a Standard Operating Procedure [SOP] is being prepared. He has submitted and it is averred in the application that only after issuance of the SOP, which is presently under preparation, it will be possible to abide by the Order dated 25.03.2026 and citing it as the reason, the instant application seeking extension of time period has been filed.

¶54

The time limit of about two months up to 22.05.2026 was recorded by this

¶55

Page No.# 5/5

¶56

Court on the basis of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants-respondent authorities in the NHAI that benefits of solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% along with interest accrued thereon would be extended to the petitioner. In this instant application, it is noticed that no fixed time period for extension has been sought for, whereas on 23.03.2026 a time period of two months was sought for. After seeking a time period of two months on 23.03.2026, an application seeking extension of time period of indefinite nature, which will be at least till preparation of the SOP, in the considered view of this Court, is not tenable.

¶57

At this stage, Mr. Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the applicants has submitted that though the application was filed in May, 2026, the application has been listed for the first time today and a period of two months from today would be reasonable and sufficient for the applicants to comply with the direction made in the Order dated 23.03.2026.

¶58

Having found the above submission of the learned counsel for the applicants regarding the extension of time period reasonable, the instant application is allowed to the extent indicated below.

¶59

The applicants i.e. the respondent authorities in the NHAI in the accompanying writ petition are allowed to extend the benefits of solatium @ 30% and interest @ 12% along with interest accrued thereon within a period of two months from today i.e. on or before 13.09.2026.

¶60

JUDGE

¶61

Comparing Assistant

The Union of India and Ors. v. Smt Kanduri Bala Ray

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Union of India and Ors. v. Smt Kanduri Bala Ray

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bimal Baishya and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Nayana Bordoloi and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sri Krishna Hazarika Vs the State of Assam and Other

Star Health and Allied Insurance Company Limited Vs Sri Sabyasachi Beb and Anr.

Rudranil Bora, Vs the State of Assam

Jalal Uddin Mazumder and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.