The Supreme Court on Monday heard the National Highways Authority of India’s (NHAI) plea challenging the retrospective application of its 2019 ruling in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, which mandates payment of solatium and interest to landowners whose land was acquired under the National Highways Act prior to 2019.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan considered NHAI’s submission that extending the benefit retrospectively would impose a massive financial burden of nearly ₹32,000 crore on the authority and should therefore operate only prospectively.

The Solicitor General, appearing for NHAI, submitted that while the 2019 Tarsem Singh judgment had extended parity in compensation by striking down Section 3J of the National Highways Act, it was never intended to reopen long-concluded matters. It was argued that the Court, while dismissing earlier challenges, had proceeded on the understanding that the overall financial implication would be around ₹100 crore, and not the far larger figure now projected if claims dating back to the late 1990s were entertained. Reliance was also placed on earlier rulings, including Sunita Mehra, to contend that disposed cases cannot be reopened.

During the hearing, the Bench clarified that the controversy is confined to whether landowners who approach courts after a prolonged delay are entitled to interest for the delayed period. The Court indicated that:

• If claims were pending as of 2008 (when the legal position evolved), entitlement to interest would follow.

• However, if landowners seek to reopen claims after a long lapse of time, they may be entitled to the principal amount but not interest for the delayed period.

The Court emphasised that implementation of earlier orders in some states does not, by itself, crystallise a binding legal principle.

The matter has been kept pending, with liberty granted to the parties to place additional written submissions within 2 weeks.