Hon’ble Krishna Singh, J.—Since the common question of facts and law are involved in these three appeals, therefore, they are being heard and decided by a common judgement.

2. All the three appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 28.2.2015 passed by the District Judge, Kaushambi dismissing the Arbitration Case No. 7/70/2013 filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the order dated 22.10.2013 passed by the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad (Arbitration Tribunal)/respondent No. 4 rejecting the application No. 29 of 2012 preferred under Section 20F(6) of the Railways Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’), whereby he refused to initiate arbitration proceedings to determine the amount of compensation of the acquired land under Section 20G(3) of the Act by modifying the award dated 6.9.2010 passed by the competent authority/respondent No. 3 under Section 20F(2) of the Act in Case No. 1/2008-09.

3. The facts giving rise to the present dispute are that the competent authority passed the order on 6.9.2010 and the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad passed an order on 22.10.2013 in respect of the claim of the appellants who happen to be the co-owners of plot No. 1348, which has been acquired for construction of the Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor by the Railways. The competent authority/Additional Magistrate-I, Kaushambi issued a notice for submitting the reply by 20.11.2010 and in pursuance thereof, the appellants submitted their reply on 19.11.2010. It is alleged that the said objection was neither disposed of nor heard and the award was passed on 6.9.2010 i.e. much before the submission of the reply, thereby rejecting the claim of the appellants on the ground that he cannot decide the compensation rate again. The Revenue Inspector and the Tehsildar submitted their reports on 25.11.2011 and 28.8.2011 to the effect that the land of the appellants was of commercial utility. The competent authority took a view that once the award passed, the same cannot be amended. Against the said order, Writ Petition No. 42018 of 2011 was filed by the appellants and the said writ petition was dismissed by this Court by observing that remedy of arbitration is available under Section 20-F(6) of the Railway (Amendment) Act, 2008. In pursuance of the said order, an arbitration application was filed before the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad, which was registered as Arbitration Case No. 30 of 2012 and the competent authority submitted parawise reply stating therein that once the award passed, the same cannot be amended. The Arbitration Tribunal/Commissioner refused to interfere in the award dated 6.9.2010 by means of order dated 22.10.2013. The aforesaid order was challenged by filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which was registered as Case No. 06/70/13 before the District Judge, Kaushambi. The District Judge by means of order dated 28.2.2015 rejected the aforesaid application. Against the said order, FAFO No. D867 of 2015 was filed alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act on 16.6.2015. Thereafter, the application for condonation of delay was taken up and the delay was condoned vide order dated 21.7.2015 and Regular No. 1953 of 2015 was allotted. On 5.12.2015 the appeal was admitted and the lower Court record was summoned. In the month of August, 2015, counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 by Sri Vijay Kumar Singh, Advocate and thereafter rejoinder-affidavit was filed on 9.11.2016.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that Chapter IV-A (Sections 20(A) to 20(P)) was inserted in the Act by Act No. 11 of 2008 w.e.f. 31.1.2008, therefore, provisions of this Chapter were applicable in the present case because the land was acquired by means of notifications dated 31.12.2008 and 9.9.2009 i.e. much after the amendment of the Act. He further submits that Section 20G(3) of the