Riar Builders Pvt Ltd v. Union of India -National Highways Act - Compensation Of Land Owners
National Highways Act, 1956 - The remedy provided to an expropriated land owner/interested party, if such person is aggrieved by the rate of compensation determined by the competent Authority, is to invoke arbitration under Section 3G(5) read with provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act - Land owners, whose land is acquired under the 1956 Act, vis-à-vis the land owners whose lands are acquired now under the New Act, have been treated as separate classes, apparently without any intelligible differentia- While there seems to be a lot of legislative wisdom discernible from the mechanism encapsulated under the 1956 Act, to the effect that the acquisition under this Act must take place in a time-bound and expeditious manner so that the development of National Highways is not hampered or delayed. Though such a legislative policy is laudable, prima facie, it seems that this object can be kept intact while ensuring the land owners that they will be entitled to assessment of compensation for the acquired land in the same manner as is determined for the land owners whose lands are acquired under the Old Act or under the New Act, even when such acquisition is also for infrastructural development - Suggestion: Union of India should revisit the legislative scheme and consider the desirability of bringing parity in the matter of providing a mechanism for the determination of the market value of acquired land with reference to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. (Para 5-11)
Case Info
Case Details
- Case name: M/s Riar Builders Pvt Ltd & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.
- Neutral citation: Not provided in the document.
- Cause titles/connected matters: SLP(C) Diary No. 26933/2025; SLP(C) No. 14758/2025; Diary No. 26939/2025; SLP(C) Nos. 15007–15008/2025; SLP(C) No. 19913/2025; SLP(C) Nos. 38016–38017/2025; SLP(C) Nos. 38019–38020/2025.
Coram
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Joymalya Bagchi; HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Vipul M. Pancholi.
Dates
- Hearing/order date: 13-01-2026.
- Next listing: 21-04-2026.
- High Court impugned judgment: 20-03-2025 (and 29-04-2025 in CM No. 6097/2025).
- Supreme Court stay of HC judgment: 30-05-2025.
- ADJ Bhiwani withdrawal order set aside: 25-04-2025 (set aside by this order).
Key Holdings and Directions
- Interlocutory Applications Nos. 10268/2026 & 10325/2026 allowed under Article 142; ADJ Bhiwani order dated 25-04-2025 permitting withdrawal of Section 34 petitions is set aside; all Section 34 petitions revived from stage of withdrawal.
- Interim orders to continue.
- Registry to forward order to Attorney General and Solicitor General; Union of India suggested to revisit parity of compensation/adjudicatory mechanism under National Highways Act, 1956 with reference to Article 300-A.
Caselaws and Citations
- Union of India & another v. Tarsem Singh & others, (2019) 9 SCC 304.
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Constitution of India: Article 142; Article 300-A.
- National Highways Act, 1956: Sections 3G, 3J; arbitral framework under Section 3G(5).
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Sections 34, 34(3), 37.
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Old Act): Section 18.
- Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (New Act).