Latest Judgement of supreme court on section 28a of land acquisition act

 

Latest Judgement of supreme court on section 28a of land acquisition act- The Indian Supreme Court recently delivered a landmark judgment interpreting Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which has crucial implications for landowners seeking fair compensation when their land is compulsorily acquired by the state. This decision clarifies the scope and timing of applications under Section 28-A and reinforces the legislative purpose behind this provision. Understanding this judgment is vital for landowners, lawyers, and policymakers engaged in disputes under Land Acquisition Law and related compensation matters.

🧠 Background: What Section 28-A Aims To Do

Section 28-A was introduced into the Land Acquisition Act to correct an inequality that often arose when some landowners managed to secure enhanced compensation via court awards, while others—who may not have filed references under Section 18—received only the basic award. The provision allows an eligible landowner, whose land falls under the same acquisition notification, to apply for redetermination of compensation based on a judicial award granted to others. It was intended as a beneficent provision to help less articulate or resource-poor landowners obtain equitable compensation.

However, until the recent Supreme Court judgment, courts differed over whether such applications could be made only based on awards from the reference court (trial court) or also on appellate judgments (e.g., High Court decisions enhancing compensation).

Also Read : How to file an objection against land acquisition legal steps explained

⚖️ Facts of the Case Before the Supreme Court

In Banwari and Others v. Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (Civil Appeal No. 13348 of 2024), land acquired in 2004 for the Kundli-Manesar-Palwal Expressway was initially compensated at a certain rate. Later, similar landowners had successfully challenged their compensation in the High Court, which enhanced the award.

Landowners who had not filed references under Section 18 then applied under Section 28-A within three months of the High Court’s enhanced award, seeking redetermination of their compensation on the same basis. The Land Acquisition Collector allowed their application, but the High Court set it aside, holding that Section 28-A applications could only be filed within three months of the reference court’s award and not based on a High Court decision.

🏛️ Supreme Court’s Key Holding

The Supreme Court, in its judgment delivered on 17 December 2024, overturned the High Court’s ruling and upheld the Land Acquisition Collector’s order granting enhanced compensation under Section 28-A. The Apex Court emphasized the following points:

1. Section 28-A Is a Beneficent Provision

The Court reiterated that Section 28-A must be interpreted as a beneficial provision intended to remove inequality in compensation. It exists to help those landowners who did not or could not challenge inadequate compensation under Section 18 but whose fellow landowners did and secured higher awards. This interpretation aligns with the legislative object of ensuring equity and fairness in Land Acquisition Law.

2. Applications Can Be Based on Enhanced Awards

Importantly, the Supreme Court ruled that a Section 28-A application can be made based on any judicial award that enhances compensation, including awards by appellate courts such as the High Court. The limitation period of three months runs from the date of the enhanced award upon which the redetermination is sought and not solely from the original reference court award.

3. Old Precedent (Ramsingbhai) Was Per Incuriam

The High Court had relied on an older Supreme Court precedent (Ramsingbhai) that restricted Section 28-A applications to reference court awards. The Supreme Court held that this approach was per incuriam (decided without considering binding authority) because it overlooked an earlier three-judge bench decision in Union of India v. Pradeep Kumari that interpreted Section 28-A more broadly. Therefore, the principle of beneficial legislation was reaffirmed.

📌 Practical Implications of the Judgment

The Supreme Court’s decision has major implications:

• Landowners can rely on High Court or even Supreme Court decisions enhancing compensation when applying under Section 28-A, provided the application is within three months of the award’s date.

• This expands access to fair compensation and reduces procedural disadvantage to landowners who did not earlier file under Section 18.

• It strengthens the protective purpose of Section 28-A as part of the broader Land Acquisition Law, ensuring equitable treatment among similarly situated landholders.

Also Read : Public Vs Private Supreme Courts New Land Ruling

🏁 Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Banwari and Others significantly clarifies the scope of Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act. By affirming that enhanced compensation awards—even those delivered by appellate courts—can form the basis for redetermination under Section 28-A, the Court upheld the true spirit of the law. This judgment ensures that landowners are not unfairly deprived of compensation due to technicalities or procedural hurdles and reinforces equity in compulsory acquisition cases.