Tuleshwari Sutradhar Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC010064672024

¶3

2026:GAU-AS:8323

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/1890/2024

¶6

TULESHWARI SUTRADHAR WIFE OF LATE GIRISH SUTRADHAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- DANGAIGAON, REVENUE CIRCLE- BIJNI, P/O- DAKHIN BIJNI, P/S/- BIJNI, DISTRICT- CHIRANG (BTAD), ASSAM, PIN- 783390.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY, NEW DELHI-01.

¶9

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPARTMENT

¶10

DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

¶11

3:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶12

P.O. AND P.S.- KOKRAJHAR

¶13

DISTRICT- KOKRAJHAR (BTAD) ASSAM

¶14

PIN- 783370.

¶15

Page No.# 2/8

¶16

4:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI) MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY

¶17

B-586 SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI- 110075.

¶18

5:THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA BTC KOKRAJHAR P.O. AND P.S.- KOKRAJHAR

¶19

PIN- 783370 DISTRICT- KOKRAJHAR (BTAD)

¶20

ASSAM.

¶21

6:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CHIRANG AT KALAIGAON P.O.- DHALIGAON PS- SHANTIPARA

¶22

DISTRICT- CHIRANG (BTAD) ASSAM PIN- 783385.

¶23

7:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA CHIRANG KAJALGAON P.O.- DHALIGAON P.S.- SHANTIPARA

¶24

DISTRICT- CHIRANG (BTAD) ASSAM

¶25

PIN- 783385. 8:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BIJNI REVENUE CIRCLE

¶26

Page No.# 3/8

¶27

P.O. AND P.S.- BIJNI

¶28

DISTRICT- CHIRANG (BTAD)

¶29

ASSAM PIN- 783390

¶30

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR R S CHAUHAN, MS. D CHAUHAN

¶31

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NHAI, SC, BTC,GA, ASSAM,SC, REVENUE

¶32

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Date : 11.06.2026

¶35

Heard Mr. R. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department; Ms. N. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, BTC, for respondent No. 3; Mr. C. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, NHAI, for respondent Nos. 4 & 7; and Mr. S. S. Roy, learned State Counsel for the respondent Nos. 6 & 8.

¶36

2. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to pay solatium @ 30% and additional interest @ 12% on the compensation awarded for the land acquired for construction of a Four Lane National Highway by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) in respect of the land measuring 1 Katha 17 Lecha covered by Dag No. 652, Periodic Patta No. 230, situated at village Dongaigaon Chit under Bijni Revenue Circle in the District of Chirang (BTAD), Assam.

¶37

Page No.# 4/8

¶38

3. The brief fact of the case is that a plot of land measuring 1 Bigha covered by Dag No. 652 of Periodic Patta No. 230, situated at village Dongaigaon Chit under Bijni Revenue Circle in the District of Chirang (BTAD), Assam, stood recorded in the name of Late Nilima Bala Sutradhar, daughter of the petitioner. Out of the said land, an area measuring 1 Katha 17 Lecha was acquired by the NHAI for construction of a Four Lane National Highway. The compensation amounting to Rs. 4,68,775/- was paid to the recorded pattadar, daughter of the petitioner, vide Cheque No. 042927 dated 25.02.2021. Subsequently, the daughter of the petitioner expired. The petitioner, being the mother of Late Nilima Bala Sutradhar, claims entitlement to the statutory benefits of solatium @ 30% and additional interest @ 12% in respect of the acquired land by NHAI.

¶39

4. It is the case of the petitioner that similarly situated landowners had approached this Court seeking payment of solatium @ 30% and additional interest @ 12% in respect of lands acquired for the same National Highway project by filing a writ petition, being WP(C) No. 511/2012. Pursuant to orders passed by this Court, the petitioner in that writ petition has been paid solatium @ 30% and additional interest @ 12%. The petitioner accordingly submitted a representation before the competent authorities claiming the said benefits of 30% solatium along with 12% interest for acquisition of the land measuring 1 Katha 7 lecha; however, the same has not been considered as on date.

¶40

5. Mr. R. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to the order passed by this Court in the case of Bijni Mohokuma Khotigrastha Pattadar Sartho Vs. The Union of India & Ors. , dated 23.05.2017, wherein this Court directed to pay solatium @ 30% and additional interest @ 12% to the

¶41

Page No.# 5/8

¶42

members of the petitioner Society for acquisition of their land for the purpose of widening of National Highway No. 31, submits that since the land of the petitioner has been acquired for construction of National Highway, which has been acquired by the same Authority, the petitioner is also entitled to the solatium @ 30% with additional interest @ 12% for the acquisition of her land. Therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to pay solatium @ 30% and the additional interest @ 12% to the petitioner.

¶43

6. Mr. C. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, NHAI, for respondent Nos. 4 & 7, on instruction, submits that the proposal for payment of solatium @ 30% and 12% interest has been submitted to the competent authority for approval. The National Highway Authorities of India (HQ) has taken up the matter with the Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Government of India and accordingly Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is expected to be issued shortly for further implementation in terms of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dated 25.03.2026, passed in Review Petition (Civil) No. 2528/2025 in Miscellaneous Application No. 1773/2021, arising out of Civil Appeal No. 7064/2019 (NHAI Vs. Tarsem Singh & Ors.). He submits that as and when the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is finalized and issued, the claim of the petitioner shall be considered and the solatium @ 30% and 12% interest will be released in accordance with law.

¶44

7. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

¶45

8. The land of the petitioner measuring 1 Katha 17 Lecha covered by Dag No.

¶46

Page No.# 6/8

¶47

652, Periodic Patta No. 230, situated at village Dongaigaon Chit under Bijni Revenue Circle, Bijni in the District of Chirang (BTAD), Assam, appears to have been acquired by the National Highway Authority of India for construction of a Four Lane National Highway under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956.

¶48

9. The National Highway Authority of India inserted Section 3-J in the National Highway Act, 1956 by way of amendment stipulating that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in toto would not apply to acquisition under the National Highway Act, 1956. In other words, that the provision of the Act of 1894 granting solatium and interest to land owners would not apply to the acquisition initiated under the National Highway Act, 1956.

¶49

10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. Vs. Tarsem Singh & Ors. , reported in (2019) 9 SCC 304 , has held that benefit of solatium and interest must be extended to the land owners even in respect of acquisition made during the period between 1997 and 2015 and the benefit of solatium and interest must be extended to the land owners even in respect of acquisition made under the National Highway Act, 1956. Section 3(J), which was inserted in the National Highway Act has been declared unconstitutional to the extent that it denied solatium and interest and the land owners were held entitled to such benefits along with interest under the proviso to Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

¶50

11. A Division Bench of this Court has also held that for acquisition proceedings under the National Highway Act, 1956, the solatium @ 30% and

¶51

Page No.# 7/8

¶52

additional interest @ 12% must be added to the acquisition compensation to be paid to the land owners. Thus, it is no longer res integra that in land acquisition under National Highway Act, 1956, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as well as the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, would be applied. In fact the provision has already been inserted in the National Highway Act, 1956 as regards the application of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶53

12. As noted above, the land, which stood in the name of the daughter of the petitioner, was acquired for construction of Four Lane National Highway by the National Highway Authority of India under the National Highway Act, 1956, for which a compensation amount of Rs. 4,68,775/- has been paid to the daughter of the petitioner. In view of the settled position that the land owners would be entitled to solatium @ 30% and additional 12% interest even if the land is acquired under National Highway Act, 1956, the petitioner would be entitled for an additional compensation @ 30% solatium and 12% interest in respect of the land acquired for construction of National Highway. In fact, the respondent/National Highway Authority has fairly stated that the case of the petitioner for payment of additional compensation @ 30% solatium and 12% interest shall be considered on issuance of Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) in terms of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 25.03.2026, passed in Review Petition (Civil) No. 2528/2025 in Miscellaneous Application No. 1773/2021, arising out of Civil Appeal No. 7064/2019 (NHAI Vs. Tarsem Singh & Ors.).

¶54

Page No.# 8/8

¶55

13. In view of above and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to release the admissible amount towards solatium @ 30% and additional interest @ 12% in respect of the land measuring 1 Katha 17 Lecha covered by Dag No. 652, Periodic Patta No. 230, situated at village Dongaigaon Chit under Bijni Revenue Circle in the district of Chirang (BTAD), Assam, acquired by the National Highways Authority of India for construction of the Four Lane National Highway, to the petitioner within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶56

14. Writ petition stands disposed of.

¶57

JUDGE

¶58

Comparing Assistant

Tuleshwari Sutradhar v. the Union of India and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tuleshwari Sutradhar v. the Union of India and 8 Ors.

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

Dr Maushumi Barooah Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Samsul Hoque Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Mozir Uddin and 23 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Mahima Khatun and Anr. Vs the Principal Secretary to the Govt of Assam and 14 Ors.

Dulal Khakhalary Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and 5 Ors.

MD Nekib Hussain Vs the Union of India