01Facts
The petitioners claimed an interest in one acre of land in Survey No. 48/1H, Itigatti Village, Dharwad District, which they said had devolved on them after the death of petitioner No. 1’s husband.
pp. 4–6The State had acquired the land for highway widening under a notification dated 15 September 2021 issued under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956.
pp. 4–6The petitioners alleged that the highway work proceeded without compensation being paid and that their representations seeking payment were not acted upon.
pp. 4–6They sought a writ directing disbursement of compensation.
pp. 4–6The respondents were unable to explain the non-payment, and the acquisition was not disputed.
p. 602Issues
i.Whether the petitioners were entitled to a direction requiring the respondents to disburse compensation for the acquired land
pp. 3, 6–7ii.Whether the failure to pay compensation despite the acquisition infringed the petitioners’ constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution
pp. 6–703Law Applied
Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 provides for notification of the Central Government’s intention to acquire land for a public purpose.
pp. 6–7Article 300A of the Constitution protects the right to property: a person may not be deprived of property except by authority of law.
pp. 6–7The Court stated that acquisition must follow due process and be accompanied by payment of just compensation; failure to pay compensation for acquired land may prejudice the affected persons’ Article 300A rights.
pp. 6–7The Court also referred generally to decisions of the High Court and Supreme Court disapproving inaction in the payment of compensation, but did not identify particular precedents.
p. 7Provisions in the judgment · 1
National Highways Act, 1956 Section 3A
04Reasoning
The acquisition of the petitioners’ land under the 15 September 2021 notification was undisputed, but compensation had not been disbursed.
pp. 6–7The respondents offered no explanation for the failure to pay, despite the petitioners’ representations.
pp. 6–7In those circumstances, the Court considered the inaction arbitrary and unsustainable, and held that non-payment prejudiced the petitioners’ constitutional property rights under Article 300A.
pp. 6–7It therefore directed payment without adjudicating the amount or setting out a separate valuation process.
pp. 6–705Holding
The Court allowed the petition in terms of the relief sought and directed the respondents to disburse compensation to the petitioners for the acquired land in Survey No. 48/1H, stated in the order as one acre (3,999 square metres).
p. 7The respondents were directed to complete the action within six weeks and file a compliance report immediately after that period.
pp. 7–8Original Court PDF
SMT SHANTAVVA W/O LATE SHANKAR TAMBADEvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
