Gauhati High Court Mandates ₹1.16 Crore Payout to Kohima Resident Over Highway Project Damage
In a significant ruling, the Gauhati High Court has ordered the National Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL) to compensate a landowner from Kohima with ₹1.16 crore. This decision comes after the construction of the four-lane National Highway-29 project caused extensive damage to his property, rendering his home and agricultural land unusable. The court emphasized that the authority cannot evade liability by attributing fault to its contractor.
Court Cites Violation of Fundamental Rights in Compensation Order
Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita, presiding over the case, highlighted that the petitioner's fundamental rights under Article 21 (right to life/livelihood) and Article 300A (right to property) of the Constitution of India were violated. The order, dated January 20, 2026, stated that the deprivation of beneficial use of the property warranted immediate judicial intervention. The petitioner, Thejao Sekhose, had previously received compensation for land acquired for the highway's right of way but was denied payment for damages beyond this boundary.
Details of Property Damage and Assessment
The petitioner claimed that during the road construction, his three-story building, piggery, and terrace field suffered severe harm due to earth-cutting and landslides. An assessment based on photographic evidence and testimonies revealed:
- Approximately eighty trees were cut down, with eighty percent being holock and twenty percent oak and other local species.
- The loss from tree damage was quantified at ₹13.93 lakh.
- The total damage to property beyond the right of way amounted to ₹1.16 crore.
Furthermore, the petitioner alleged that his private approach road was used for waste disposal and eventually severed without permission, exacerbating the accessibility issues.
Court Rejects NHIDCL's Defense and Orders Timely Payment
The NHIDCL argued that the engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractor, Gayatri Projects Limited, should be held responsible, citing non-joinder of necessary parties. However, the court dismissed this, stating that the NHIDCL, as the principal authority, remains liable for the actions of its contractors. The order directed the NHIDCL to pay the compensation within three months, after which it could seek reimbursement from the contractor under indemnity clauses.
Justice Kalita noted that it would be inappropriate to refer the matter to a civil court after more than seven years of delay, especially since other similarly affected landowners had already been compensated. This disparity was deemed discriminatory under Article 14 of the Constitution.
Background and Implications of the Ruling
The case dates back to 2018, when site verifications by local officials confirmed the genuineness of the damage, yet no compensation was provided. This ruling underscores the accountability of public authorities in infrastructure projects and sets a precedent for protecting landowners' rights against negligent construction practices. It reinforces the legal principle that entities cannot absolve themselves of liability by shifting blame to contractors, ensuring justice for affected individuals.
