National Highway Authority of India through its Project Director Mr. Prabhat Kumar, S/o Shri C.P. Roy vs State Of Jharkhand

Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J

All these writ petitions have been preferred against the orders passed by the Additional Collector-cum-Arbitrator, Bokaro in Land Acquisition Appeal Nos. 08/2016-17, 11/2016-17, 14/2016-17, 06/2016-17, 07/2016-17, 09/2016-17 and 12/2016-17, whereby and whereunder, the appeals were allowed for enhancement of compensation.

Aggrieved by the awards, the instant writ petitions have been filed.

A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for the respondents with regard to maintainability of these writ petitions.

It is contended that the petitioner of these cases have an alternative/statutory/efficacious remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the impugned awards, as the same will come within the meaning of award by the Arbitrator.

It is further argued that writ petitions arising from the award by the Arbitrator was held to be not maintainable, as the petitioner had alternative/statutory/efficacious remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as held by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 4438 of 2021.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the compensation, ordered, will not come within the meaning of award and, therefore, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act will not apply. It is argued that the assessment of compensation is to be based on the market value of the land on the date of application of the notification under Section 3A of National Highways Act, 1956 in the light of the provision under Section 3(7)(a) of National Highways Act, 1956. In the present cases, the Six Members Committee has not considered the market value as on the date of publication of the notification but has taken into account the current market value.

Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides, this Court is of the view that the point being raised on behalf of the petitioner goes into the merit of the instant writ petitions which can be considered by the statutory authority to hear the appeal arising out of the arbitral awards.

All these writ petitions are not maintainable and are, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the petitioner of these cases is at liberty to take alternative/statutory/efficacious remedy under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the impugned award.

Pending, I.A., if any, stands disposed of...