Supreme Court bats for Highways Act amendment, says bureaucrats should not decide land compensation disputes

The Supreme Court of India has expressed its disapproval of a system where bureaucrats decide land compensation disputes under the National Highways Act, 1956. In a recent observation, the court noted that such disputes involve a judicial exercise and should be heard by judicially trained adjudicators. The court's comments highlight concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the current system, which may disadvantage landowners in proceedings under the Highways Act.

The Supreme Court of India has weighed in on the issue of land compensation disputes under the National Highways Act, 1956, observing that it is not acceptable for bureaucrats to decide such matters. The court's comments were made in a recent case, M/S Riar Builders Pvt Ltd v. Union of India, where a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana expressed concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the current system.

The National Highways Act, 1956, is a legislation that governs land acquisition for national highways in India. Under this act, compensation disputes are typically decided by government-appointed bureaucrats. However, the Supreme Court's recent observation highlights concerns about the fairness and impartiality of this system. The court noted that lands adjoining national highways typically command higher market values, and that farmers may be denied solatium and interest in proceedings under the Highways Act.

The Supreme Court's comments on land compensation disputes under the National Highways Act have significant implications for the fairness and impartiality of the current system. The court's observation that bureaucrats should not decide such matters highlights concerns about the potential for bias and lack of expertise in these proceedings. Furthermore, the court's note that lands adjoining national highways command higher market values suggests that landowners may be disadvantaged under the current system.

The Supreme Court's recent observation on land compensation disputes under the National Highways Act highlights concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the current system. Practitioners should take note of this development and consider its implications for future proceedings under the act.