JUDGMENT

Mr. Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.

The petitioner - National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) assails order dated 17.01.2023 (Annexure P-6) vide which the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, while allowing an application filed by the petitioner under section 36(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') seeking stay of operation of the award dated 27.09.2019, imposed a condition to deposit the entire enhanced awarded amount alongwith requisite interest, within 4 months, in terms of the award dated 27.09.2019 of Arbitrator, before the CALA and directed that 50% of amount shall be released to the land-owner subject to his furnishing indemnity bonds of double of the amount with one surety of the like amount and balance of the 50% amount be kept in the shape of FDR and not to be released till final disposal of the petition under Section 34 of the Act.

2. A few facts, necessary to notice for disposal of the instant revision petition, are that the land belonging to respondent No.l as well as other land-owners was acquired under the provisions of National Highway Act, 1956. The Competent Authority -cum- SDM, Ludhiana assessed the compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.213.52 per square meter apart from other statutory benefits. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Arbitrator, who enhanced the compensation to Rs.8373/- per square meter vide award dated 27.09.2019 (Annexure P-1).

3. The petitioner filed a petition under Section 34 of the Act in the Court of District Judge, Patiala assailing the award dated 27.09.2019 (Annexure P-l) passed by the Arbitrator. Along with the said petition, the petitioner also moved an application under Section 36 (2) of the Act seeking stay of the operation of the award. The Court of Additional District Judge, Patiala considered the said application and disposed of the same by passing a detailed order dated 17.01.2023 (Annexure P-6), the operative portion of which is reproduced hereinunder:

"16. However, applying the yardsticks of the above referred authorities and in the interest of justice, the present application filed under section 36 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is allowed and operation of the award dated 27.9.2019 is stayed till the disposal of the objection petition under Section 34 of the Act. However, same is subject to the deposit of entire enhanced awarded amount alongwith requisite interest, within four months, in terms of the award dated 27.9.2021 of Arbitrator, before the CALA and 50% of amount shall be released to the land owner subject to his furnishing indemnity bonds of double of the amount with one surety of the like amount, as per award dated 27.9.2021 and balance of the 50% amount be kept in the shape of FDR and not to be released till final disposal of the petition under Section 34 of the Act. The application is accordingly allowed in the aforestated terms."

4. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, operation of the Award dated 27.09.2019 sought to be stayed, inter alia, on the ground that the compensation has been enhanced arbitrarily and also on the ground that the Presiding Officer has been passing inconsistent orders in cases of identical nature. It has been submitted that vide order dated 27.07.2022 (Annexure P-7) passed in Arb. No.710 of 2019 titled ' Union of India v. Vijay Kumar ' and order dated 21.09.2022 (Annexure P-8) passed in Arb. No.7 of 2022 titled ' Union of India v. Darbara Singh ', the same very Presiding Officer had stayed the operation of the impugned Award while directing the entire compensation be kept invested in the shape of FDR and be not released till the final dispo