By the Court.—By means of this writ petition petitioners are challenging the award dated 29.7.2009 given by the Arbitrator under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. The reliefs as sought in the writ petition are as follows:

(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29.7.2009 passed by respondent No. 3, District Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

(II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to enhance the rate of the land compensation of the petitioner Rs. 5000/- per sq. meter or paid as per the rate given by Gail India Limited and Indian Oil Corporation fixed by compromise by both the party Rs. 4400/- per sq. meter and direct the respondents to pay 10% interest alongwith.

(III) Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon’ble Cort may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case.

2. Heard Sri Yogendra Nath Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri R.K. Singh, learned counsel appearing for opposite party-respondent No. 2 and learned standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 3.

3. The contentions as raised in the writ petition are to the effect that the petitioners are aggrieved, and thus are challenging the legality and the validity of the order dated 29.7.2009 passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad by which the rate of the acquired land of the petitioners has been fixed as Rs. 820.00 by the Arbitrator. It has been contended that the said compensation is totally arbitrary and against the norms.

4. The facts as stated in the writ petition are that the petitioners were the owners of gata No. 155, khasra No. 422, area 5080 sq. meter situate in Village Basantpur Saintali, Pargana Jalalabad, Tehsil Modi Nagar, District Ghaziabad; that petitioners land was acquired for the construction of National High Way (Eastern Periphered Way) and notification under Section 3A was published on 2.8.2006 under the National Highways Act, 1956 in the local newspaper on 23.8.2006 and 24.8.2006 and declaration under Section 3D of National Highway Act was published on 30.11.2006; that petitioners have received compensation as per rate of Rs. 820/- fixed by the competent authority; that without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, rate was fixed by the competent authority @ Rs. 820/- per sq. meter; that the assessed market rate of the land of the petitioners fixed by the competent authority, Court of A.D.M. is very less on 25.1.2008, which is not acceptable by the petitioners; that petitioners land was situated on Delhi Meerut Road which comes under the National Capital Region, the market value of the petitioners’ land is not less than Rs. 5,000/- per sq. meter, the assessment of the market rate decided by the Collector Ghaziabad was must less; that the circle rate is not the market value, the judgment given by the competent authority is absolutely illegal and arbitrary and the assessment of the land was not fixed as per norms prescribed for such fixation.

5. Accordingly, it has been prayed by the petitioners that the respondents be directed to pay the compensation at the rate of the market value, same being not less than Rs. 5000/- per sq. meter.

6. Thus, the petitioners are basically aggrieved against the quantum of compensation that has been fixed by the Arbitrator.

7. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 2, in which a stand has been taken that as the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy available of moving an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and thereafter again by filing an appeal under Section 37 of the Act against the order, if any, passed in proceedings under Section 34 of the Act, the writ petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy, being available to the petitioners.

8. To the said counter-affidavit, a rejoinder-affida