The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has held that the government can issue a supplementary compensation award for damages to trees, buildings, and machines that were missed during the original land acquisition process.
The Court was hearing a petition filed by Amanullah Khan, who operated a brick kiln on leased land. His business was severely affected when the Batote-Doda National Highway (NH-1B) was widened. Justice Sanjay Dhar allowed Khan’s writ petition and directed the Land Acquisition Collector to assess the damage and proceed with compensation.
Khan had leased the land in 1998, with proper license and pollution clearance. His brick kiln ran smoothly for eight years until the highway project began in 2008. According to Khan, construction activity damaged the kiln and its approach road, forcing its closure, even though the license was valid until 2009.
Despite continuous appeals and applications to different authorities since 2008, no compensation was provided. Revenue officers inspected the site multiple times and confirmed that parts of the kiln fell under the highway’s expansion zone. Yet, the Border Roads Organization (BRO), named as Respondents 1 to 3 in the case, denied liability.
The BRO argued that the kiln was not within the 61-feet width acquired for the highway and that no damage had occurred. They also claimed Khan had no right to compensation since he was a lessee and not the landowner. Furthermore, they stated that since the road was handed over to the State PWD, they no longer held responsibility.
“Once a joint inspection is done by competent revenue officers and not challenged by the BRO, its findings are binding,” the Court observed. Justice Dhar rejected BRO’s argument, calling it legally unsound.
Read Also:- Allahabad High Court Allows Rituals at Bahraich Dargah, But Refuses Full-Fledged Jeth Mela for Now
The BRO also claimed the Collector was functus officio — meaning had no power to act after the original award. The Court disagreed, citing earlier judgments. It referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Mohanji v. State of UP and a Division Bench ruling in Divisional Commissioner v. Ghulam Nabi Bhat, both of which permit supplementary awards for items missed initially.
“…once an award has been made, it cannot be stated that no award could be made thereafter in respect of buildings, trees and machinery, etc. Landowners or interested persons are entitled to claim compensation for these by seeking a reference under Section 18 of the Act,” the Court reaffirmed.
Another key point made by the Court was the BRO’s attempt to escape responsibility by saying the road was now managed by the PWD. The Court strongly rejected this.
“…The acquisition was carried out by Respondents 1 to 3, so the compensation responsibility remains with them, even if the road is now under the PWD. They cannot avoid this duty,” the judgment stated.
The Court finally ordered the Land Acquisition Collector to begin the process of loss assessment and complete the compensation procedure within six months from the receipt of the judgment copy.
Case Title: Amanullah Khan Vs Union of India & Ors
