SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Raj) 1850

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR BENCH
SANDEEP MEHTA, J.
Pushpa Bai W/o Shri Jagdish Agarwal - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ No. 14074 of 2015
Decided On : 14-12-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rakesh Arora, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Mukesh Dave, Advocate.

Headnote:

National Highway Act - Section 3G(5) - Land case - Compensation - Land for development - Petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved of the order passed by the District Collector, Pratapgarh whereby, the application submitted on behalf of the petitioners for modification/enhancement in the amount of compensation pursuant to the acquisition of the petitioners land for development of National was rejected on the ground that the adjudication of such dispute could only be made by raising a dispute in the competent court - Held, Impugned order is hereby quashed and set aside - Matter is remitted back to the District Collector, Pratapgarh to decide the application for enhancement in compensation submitted on behalf of the petitioner by exercising the powers of Arbitration conferred upon him by Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act objectively and on merits after providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned - Disposal of the application upon remand shall be made as per law within a period of six months from the date of submission of copy of this order - Petition allowed.

ORDER :

Sandeep Mehta, J.

1. The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved of the order (Annexure-6) dated 14.03.2015 passed by the District Collector, Pratapgarh whereby, the application submitted on behalf of the petitioners for modification/enhancement in the amount of compensation pursuant to the acquisition of the petitioners' land for development of National No.113 was rejected on the ground that the adjudication of such dispute could only be made by raising a dispute in the competent court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed on record copy of State Government's notification/circular dated 08.02.2015 as per which, the District Collectors concerned have been authorised to act as Arbitrators under Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act and to decide such applications.

3. Shri Mukesh Dave, learned AGC does not dispute the fact that the District Collector is authorised to act as an Arbitrator under Section 3(g)(5) of the National Highway Act and is competent to adjudicate the application filed by the petitioners under Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act.

4. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the order under challenge is illegal and does not stand to scrutiny.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order (Annexure-6) dated 14.03.2015 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the District Collector, Pratapgarh to decide the application for enhancement in compensation submitted on behalf of the petitioner by exercising the powers of Arbitration conferred upon him by Section 3G(5) of the National Highway Act objectively and on merits after providing opportunity of hearing to all the concerned. The disposal of the application upon remand shall be made as per law within a period of six months from the date of submission of copy of this order.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top