Satish Kumar Etc. v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Background
The appellants were landowners whose land had been acquired, and they were aggrieved that the compensation awarded to them had not been enhanced, despite a group of similarly-placed landowners (in an earlier case, Sachin & Ors. vs State of Haryana & Ors.) having already secured enhanced compensation from the Supreme Court in 2015. The State's own Additional Advocate General confirmed on instructions that these appellants were "similarly situated" to the appellants in that earlier Sachin case.
Decision Breakdown
Given the State's concession that the facts were identical to the earlier Sachin judgment, the Supreme Court condoned the delay, granted leave, and allowed the appeals strictly in terms of the compensation formula already laid down in the 2015 Sachin judgment, making that earlier judgment part of this order. The only qualification added was that the appellants would not be entitled to statutory benefits (such as additional interest) for any period of delay caused either before the High Court or before the Supreme Court. No costs were ordered.
Lesson Learnt
Where a government authority itself concedes that a new claimant's facts are identical to an already-decided precedent, courts will apply that precedent directly rather than re-litigate the same compensation question, but delay in pursuing a claim can still cost a litigant statutory benefits for the delayed period.