https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311663 An agreement under a compensation scheme did not waive landowners' right to challenge a later discriminatory revision in compensation, because the equality grievance arose only after the impugned classification came into existence. A distinction between Pushtaini and Gair-pushtaini landowners for compensation and ex gratia failed Article 14 scrutiny: it lacked a substantiated intelligible differentia, had no rational nexus with a lawful object, and was disproportionate. The note also records that differential compensation based on personal status or residence-linked labels is impermissible where the statute does not authorise it, and that the classification was inconsistent with the principle in Nagpur Improvement Trust. en-us Mon, 20 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 07 Jan 2024 21:01:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311663 An agreement under a compensation scheme did not waive landowners' right to challenge a later discriminatory revision in compensation, because the equality grievance arose only after the impugned classification came into existence. A distinction between Pushtaini and Gair-pushtaini landowners for compensation and ex gratia failed Article 14 scrutiny: it lacked a substantiated intelligible differentia, had no rational nexus with a lawful object, and was disproportionate. The note also records that differential compensation based on personal status or residence-linked labels is impermissible where the statute does not authorise it, and that the classification was inconsistent with the principle in Nagpur Improvement Trust. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 20 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311663