33 WP NO. 13678 OF 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13678 OF 2021 Rajendra Uttamchand Katariya VERSUS The National Highway Authority Of India Through Its Project Director And Another … • Mr. Vijay B. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. • Mr. K. N. Lokhande, AGP for Respondent - State • Mr. Ravi R. Bangar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. … CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 17th AUGUST, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard. By consent, taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. Learned Advocate for the petitioners, at the outset, submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Highways Authority of India vs. Tarsem Singh and Others in Review Petition (Civil) No. 2528 of 2025. The review petition was disposed of by issuing the following directions. Paragraph 14 of the said judgment is quoted below:- “ 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: Jhs/ 1/4 2026:BHC-AUG:37153-DB 33 WP NO. 13678 OF 2021 (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. Learned Advocate for the petitioners, therefore, submits that the petitioners are also entitled to the benefit of paragraph 14 of the aforesaid judgment. There is no dispute that the case of the petitioners is covered by the above-mentioned judgment. It is only submitted that, in case there is any dispute regarding the calculation of the compensation amount, it would be open for the parties to approach the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Jhs/ 2/4 33 WP NO. 13678 OF 2021 Highways Act, 1956. Considering the above, the following order is passed:- ORDER A) The petition is allowed by directing the competent authorities to compute and pay to the petitioner solatium and interest in accordance with the principles enunciated in the case of Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others (Supra) within a period of six (6) months from today. B) It is made clear that the petitioner shall assist the competent authorities by producing all relevant documents and upon verification of the same, the competent authorities shall proceed further. It is also clarified that payments made pursuant to the directions given herein above, shall be subject to the challenges, if any, raised under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. C) In the light of the observations made herein above, it is further made clear that if any of the parties are aggrieved by the quantum and computation carried out by the competent authority while carrying out the directions given herein above, the remedy of Section 3G (5) of the National Jhs/ 3/4 33 WP NO. 13678 OF 2021 Highways Act, 1956 would be available to such aggrieved party in accordance with law. It is further made clear that the competent Authority while implementing the directions given herein above shall give reasonable hearing to all stakeholders. 4. In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of. [JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] Jhs/ 4/4