Land Acquisition – National Highways Act – Solatium and interest – Entitlement – Not dependent on financial burden (Paras 7–8, 10) The entitlement of landowners to ‘solatium’, ‘interest’ and ‘interest on solatium’ forms an integral component of just compensation. Such entitlement cannot be denied or diluted on the ground of financial burden upon the acquiring authority. Even a substantial escalation in fiscal liability does not constitute a ground for review or modification of a binding judgment recognising such rights.

advocatemmmohan

Land Acquisition – National Highways Act – Solatium and interest – Entitlement – Not dependent on financial burden
(Paras 7–8, 10)
The entitlement of landowners to ‘solatium’, ‘interest’ and ‘interest on solatium’ forms an integral component of just compensation. Such entitlement cannot be denied or diluted on the ground of financial burden upon the acquiring authority. Even a substantial escalation in fiscal liability does not constitute a ground for review or modification of a binding judgment recognising such rights.

---

Review jurisdiction – Scope – Error apparent – Financial miscalculation not sufficient
(Paras 6–8)
Correction of a clerical or factual error regarding the quantum of financial liability does not, by itself, amount to an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review, particularly where the underlying legal principle remains unaffected.

---

Finality of litigation – Reopening of concluded cases – Impermissibility
(Paras 11–12)
Where compensation proceedings have attained finality and are no longer subject to challenge before any forum, a subsequent change or clarification in law does not entitle parties to reopen such concluded cases. The doctrine of finality mandates that settled claims cannot be revived for additional benefits.

---

Land acquisition – Delayed claims – Balancing of equities
(Paras 11–13)
While landowners may be entitled in principle to solatium and interest, claims raised after inordinate delay must be subjected to equitable balancing. Courts may deny interest for the period of delay, thereby preserving both the statutory entitlement and the principle against stale claims.

---

Prospective application – Clarification – Pending proceedings distinguished from concluded cases
(Paras 9–10, 14)
Entitlement to solatium and interest extends to cases where compensation proceedings were pending as on the relevant cut-off date, but does not extend to cases already concluded. The distinction between pending and finally decided matters is determinative of entitlement.

---

Cut-off date – Relevance – 28.03.2008
(Para 14)
The date corresponding to the judgment in Golden Iron and Steel serves as the benchmark for determining entitlement. Claims alive on or after 28.03.2008 are eligible for consideration, whereas claims concluded prior thereto are not liable to be reopened.

---

Interest – Denial for delayed assertion of claim
(Para 14(ii))
Where landowners assert claims for solatium or interest belatedly, they are disentitled to interest for the period of delay, and such benefits accrue only from the date of assertion of claim.

---

Remand – Recalculation of compensation components
(Para 16)
Matters requiring computation of solatium, interest and interest on solatium are liable to be remanded to appropriate courts for recalculation strictly in accordance with the principles laid down.

---

Recovery – Bar against refund of amounts already paid
(Para 17)
Amounts already disbursed towards solatium or interest shall not be recovered, even if subsequent clarification limits entitlement.

---

RESULT

Review Petition disposed of with clarifications; entitlement to solatium and interest upheld subject to limitations relating to delay and finality; matters remanded for recalculation; recovery of amounts already paid prohibited.
(Paras 14–17)