14966.19wp (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 955 WRIT PETITION NO. 14966 OF 2019 NAGNATH BASAPPA KARPE THROUGH LRS KAMALBAI NAGNATH KARPE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ….. Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner Mr Rohit Sarvadnya, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4 Mr A. S. Shinde, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State Mr D. P. Madkar, Advocate h/f Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for Respondent No.5 AND 957 WRIT PETITION NO. 5978 OF 2021 RAJESHWAR ALIAS RAJSHAKHAR CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ….. Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner Mr Rajendra Sanap, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4 Mr S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State Mr S. P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.5 AND 959 WRIT PETITION NO. 10330 OF 2021 ANIL CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ….. Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State Mr S. P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.5 2026:BHC-AUG:26310-DB 14966.19wp (2) AND 960 WRIT PETITION NO. 10336 OF 2021 PARVATIBAI CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ….. Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner Ms Mayuri G. Kasturkar (Kulkarni), Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4 Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State Mr S. P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.5 AND 961 WRIT PETITION NO. 10350 OF 2021 VITTHAL PANDURANG SURVASE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ….. Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State Mr N. T. Tribhuwan, Advocate for Respondent No.4 Mr D. P. Madkar, Advocate h/f Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for Respondent No.5 AND 964 WRIT PETITION NO. 12365 OF 2021 ANIL CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ….. Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner Mr Nandkishor U. Yadav, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4 Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State Mr D. P. Madkar, Advocate h/f Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for Respondent No.5 ….. 14966.19wp (3) CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ. DATE : 02nd JULY 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective sides in all these petitions. With their consent, taken up for final disposal. 2. The grievance of the petitioners lies within a very narrow compass. Properties of the petitioners have been already acquired by the acquiring body and compensation is also paid. The grievance is about non-payment of solatium amount, component and interest from the date of claim. Though in these petitions, claim is made from the date of receipt of compensation, however, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of National Highways Authority of India Vs. Tarsem Singh and others (Review Petition (Civil) No.2528/2025 has granted benefit of interest only from the date when the petitions were filed or claim were made by the claimants. Paragraph No.14 of the said judgment reads as under:- 14966.19wp (4) “14. Considering the facts and circumstances explained in the instant proceedings along with the various submissions placed on record and with a view to balancing the equities regarding delay and the entitlements of the landowners, we issue the following directions: (i) All landowners whose claims re: the quantum and/or components of compensation for their lands acquired under the NH Act were alive on or after 28.03.2008, i.e., they were pending before one of the prescribed fora, shall be entitled to seek addition of 'interest', 'solatium', and 'interest on the solatium' to their compensation claim; (ii) In the cases where compensation claims are alive on the aforesaid date, but the landowner has claimed 'interest'. 'solatium', and 'interest on solatium after 28.03.2008, no interest on both components shall be payable for the period of delay. Such landowner shall be entitled to 'interest' and 'interest on solatium' only from the date on which such claims were raised; and (iii) If the claims of the landowners stood concluded prior to 28.03.2008, with no further appeal, Writ Petition, Special Leave Petition, etc., then such landowners are not entitled to seek reopening, review, or modification of the said decision for the purpose of claiming 'solatium' or 'interest'.” 3. Considering paragraph No.14 of the judgment in the matter of National Highways Authority of India (supra), this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of all these petitions with certain directions. Accordingly, all these petitions are partly allowed. The 14966.19wp (5) petitioners are held entitled to receive amount of solatium as well as interest thereon. The said interest shall be payable from the date on which these petitions have been filed. Needless to state, if any calculation is disputed by any of the parties, it is open for the said parties to approach Arbitrator under the National Highways Act, as per law. [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] sjk