In Brief
The State of Tamil Nadu challenged a High Court order directing it to allot alternative housing sites to landowners whose property was acquired for the MRTS Railway Project. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that no legal obligation existed to provide alternative accommodation. While schemes for housing acquisition included such relief, the MRTS was a central government railway project with no applicable policy for alternative housing. The Court distinguished precedents involving urban development schemes, reaffirming that once land vests in the State under the Land Acquisition Act, owners receive only compensation, not additional relief, absent a specific project policy or voluntary government offer.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.