Section 29A of Arbitration Act inapplicable to arbitrations under Section 3G(5) of National Highways Act as special code; Central Government exclusive appointment overrides court extension/substitution; no patent illegality in uniform compensation via Section 26 criteria.

JUDGMENT :

ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

1. The present Arbitration Appeals are filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the appellants- National Highway Authority challenging the Judgment and Order dated 16/10/2025 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Aurangabad in the proceedings filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. By the said judgment, the learned Principal District Judge, Aurangabad dismissed the applications filed under of the Act and upheld the arbitral award passed by the learned Arbitrator.

2. All the Arbitration Appeals involve common issues and arise out of acquisition of lands for the expansion of highway in village Gandheli wherein uniform compensation for the acquired lands are granted. Hence, they are taken up together for hearing and are being decided by this common judgment.

3. The following questions arise for consideration of this Court in the present appeals:

a) Whether Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applies to the arbitration proceedings conducted under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 ? If so, whether the provisions of Section 29A as introduced by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, brought into force with effect from 23/10/2015, apply to the present arbitration proceedings, or whether the amended provisions of Section 29A as substituted by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019 would govern the proceedings ?

b) If Section 29A is held to be applicable, whether the award passed under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act beyond the prescribed period of mandate under Section 29A in absence of order of continuation of mandate of the arbitrator would be without jurisdiction and is liable to be set aside ?

c) Whether the Arbitrator has failed to apply the parameters laid down under Section 26 of the RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT , 2013 while determining the compensation, and thereby the award passed suffers from patent illegality ?

4. For the sake of convenience, the facts in Arbitration Appeal No.10 of 2026 alone are referred to. The brief facts of the appeal are as under :

The Central Government issued a notification under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the “NH Act”) on 18/09/2015 declaring its intention to acquire the lands specified therein for the purpose of widening National Highway No.211. Thereafter, the final declaration under Section 3D of the NH Act was published on 16/09/2016.

5. The Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) determined and published an award under Section 3G(1) of the NH Act determining compensation of Rs.83,19,534/- @ Rs.1086/- per Square Meter for acquisition of an area admeasuring 3400 square meters belonging to the respondents/claimants. Being aggrieved by the said award, the respondents/ claimants invoked the provisions of Section 3G(5) of the NH Act seeking reference to arbitration.

6. The learned Arbitrator thereafter passed an award enhancing the compen