Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J. – The present Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1996’) for the following reliefs: –

“1. That the present Misc. Appeal is being filed for setting aside the judgment dated 02.07.2021 passed by the learned Additional District Judge VIII, Aurangabad in Civil Misc. Application Case No. 79 of 2018 / 02 of 2021, whereby and where under the order dated 14.02.2017 in L.A Case No. 102/2016-17 passed by the Respondent No. 2 (Arbitrator-cum-Additional Collector, Aurangabad) (Annexure-4) has been up-held and the original award dt-30.11.2015 in L.A Case No. 58 (IX) of 2012-13 passed by the Respondent No.-3 (Competent Authority – Cum-CDLR, Aurangabad) (Annexue 3) has been set aside.

(ii) For setting aside the order dated 14.02.2017 in L.A Case No. 102/2016-17 passed by the Respondent no.-2 (Arbitrator-Cum-Additional Collector, Aurangabad) (Annexure-4) by which the original award dt-20-11- 2015 has been directed to be modified in terms of the observations made therein.

(iii) For setting aside the Revised award dt-22.07.2021 passed by the Respondent no.-3 in pursuance of the order dt-02-07-2021 (Annexure-7) . As a result the amount of compensation has been increased from Rs. 88,77,420/- in terms of original award to Rs. 13,88,57,762/- according to the revised award for the same plot of land. This increase is more than 1500% only due to change in classification of land from agricultural to commercial.”

Brief Facts of the Case

2. The National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NHAI’) was entrusted with the work of widening/six laning work of NH-2 (Aurangabad-Chordaha Section) in the district of Aurangabad. In connection with this work, an acquisition proceeding in respect of a piece of plot bearing no. 1461 khata No. 171 measuring area 0.3887 hectare in Village Madanpur Anchal-Madanpur, District- Aurangabad (Bihar) owned and possessed by the respondent no. 1 was initiated in accordance with the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1956’). A Gazette notification dated 14.01.2013 under Section 3A of the Act of 1956 followed by a notification dated 06.01.2004 under Section 3D of the same Act was issued in which the land in question was classified as agricultural land on the basis of actual land usage as on 14.01.2013.

3. The District Level Committee entrusted with the work of classification of the nature of the land conducted site verification of the land and recommended the nature of land as agricultural land. Based on the said recommendation, the respondent no. 3 who is the Competent Authority-cum-DCLR, Aurangabad determined the compensation and communicated the amount payable to the Project Director, NHAI, Dhanbad vide his letter No. 647 dated 30.11.2015 (Annexure-3 to the Memo of Appeal). In respect of the land in question, in L.A. Case No. 58(IX)/2012-13 the competent authority found the respondent no. 1 entitled for Rs.88,77,420/-.

Challenge to the compensation determined by the competent authoirty.

4. Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the compensation determined by the respondent no. 3, the land owner-respondent no. 1 filed an application under Section 3G(5) of the Act of 1956 before the Arbitrator (respondent no. 2). On behalf of the land owner, it was contended that on the land in question weekly cattle fair is being held for last 70 years. The land is registered in the name of the mother of respondent no. 1 and she had been paying tax to the Market Committee. It was contended that the land under acquisition is totally commercial and compensation should be determined accordingly. The land owner assailed the compensation determined by the competent authority. From the arbitration award dated 14.02.2017 as contained in Annexure ‘4’ to the memo of appeal, it appears that the Additional Collector, Aurangabad who was acting as the Arbitrator went for ins