Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAKESH THAPLIYAL
Saravan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Competent Authority Special Land Acquisition – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. In all these bunch of writ petitions preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, common question of law and facts are involved, therefore, all the writ petitions are being heard and decided together by this common judgment. Writ Petition No. 534 of 2025 is being treated to be leading one.
2. In all these writ petitions, petitioners are challenging the order passed by the Arbitrator /Collector, Udham Singh Nagar, whereby applications preferred by petitioners under Section 3 (G) (5) of the National Highway Act, 1956 has been rejected at the admission stage on the ground of limitation. Admittedly, land of the petitioners were acquired for widening of NH 74 from Kashipur to Sitarganj from 175 km. to 252 km and the Competent Authority / Special Land Acquisition Officer i.e. respondent no. 1 herein has passed an Award on 27.04.2015 followed by Supplementary Award dated 20.01.2017.
3. Case of the petitioners are that due to financial constraints and lack of legal knowledge Award could not be challenged within time and subsequently, after arranging the fund, the application was filed under Section 3 (G) (5) of the National Highway Act after seve
Writ petitions under Article 227 challenging arbitrator's rejection of compensation enhancement applications under National Highways Act on limitation grounds held not maintainable due to alternative....
The Limitation Act applies to arbitration under the National Highways Act, and a writ petition is maintainable when an Arbitrator refuses to entertain an application.
The High Court cannot entertain writ petitions challenging arbitral awards after the statutory limitation period has expired, reinforcing the need for adherence to legislative intent in arbitration m....
The High Court held that challenges to arbitral awards under the National Highways Act must be pursued through statutory remedies rather than under Article 226, ensuring procedural fairness in proper....
Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings is limited; parties must await the final award unless a right of appeal exists, and a liberal approach is adopted for condoning delays in land acquisitio....
The court emphasized a liberal approach to condoning delays in land acquisition cases, allowing petitions despite alternative remedies being available.
The court ruled that Section 14 of the Limitation Act applies to Section 34 applications under the Arbitration Act, allowing for the exclusion of certain periods in computing limitation.
Statutory arbitration under the National Highways Act is governed by the Arbitration Act, and any delay allegations must be addressed exclusively in civil court, not via writ petitions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
