##PAGE1##

2026:JHHC:8692

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1878 of 2026

------

Shakuntala Devi, Wife of Baikunth Singh, R/o Village- Redma, P.O.-G.L.A. College, P.S. Sadar, Medninagar, Dist.-Palamau.

… … Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau, P.O. & P.S. Palamau, Dist.

Palamau.

3. The Arbitrator, NHAI-cum-Addl. Collector, Palamau, P.O. & P.S.

Palamau, Dist.- Palamau.

4. The District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority, Palamau, P.O. & P.S. Palamau, Dist. Palamau.

5. The National Highway Authority of India through its Chairman having its office at National Highway Authority of India G5 & 6

Sector-10, P.O. & P.S. Dwarka, New Delhi -110075.

6. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India, PIV Durgapur, NHAI Complex, Sector 2A, Bidhan Nagar, Durgapur,

P.O. & P.S.-Bidhan Nagar, Dist.-Burdwan (W.B.)

… … Respondent(s)

------

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, AAG-III For the NHAI : Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate

------

02/ 26^th March, 2026

1. Heard the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 17.07.2025 passed by the Arbitrator, NHAI-cum-Additional Collector (Respondent No. 3), whereby and whereunder the respondent No. 3 has failed to consider the legitimate claim of the petitioner for payment of adequate and fair compensation in respect of acquisition of her land

for construction of NH-75.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been discriminated as he has been paid less compensation. He further submits that his neighbour, whose land has been acquired has been paid more, whereas the petitioner has been paid less, though there are no substantial difference in the nature of the land of the

petitioner.

4. Admittedly, the land of the petitioner has been acquired under the National Highway Act, 1956. The petitioner is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation as he claims that he should have

1

2026:JHHC:8692

received more compensation in parity with his neighbhour.

5. The National Highway Act, 1956 is a complete code in itself. Section 3G of the said Act deals with the provision of determination of the amount payable as compensation. As per Section 3 (G) (5) of the said Act, if the compensation determined is not accepted to the parties, he has to make an application for appointment of an Arbitrator by the Central Government. As per Section 3 (G) (6) of the Act, the provision of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall apply is also applicable. It is necessary to

quote Sections 3 (G) (5) and 3 (G) (6).

3G. Determination of amount payable as compensation.

(1)—(4)------

(5) If the amount determined by the competent authority under sub- section (1) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central

Government—

(6) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to

every arbitration under this Act.

6. Further, as per Section 3 (g) (7) of the Act, the Arbitrator has been given wide power to consider the market value of the land

and other aspects.

7. The petitioner invoking the aforesaid provisions had approached the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator vide Annexure-4 has rejected the claim of the petitioner. Since the provisions of Arbitration Act is applicable, this decision is an Award. As per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, an award has to be challenged under Section 34 of the aforesaid Act. The petitioner without challenging the same before the appropriate forum, has approached this Court by invoking

Article 226 of the Constitution.

8. Thus, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. The petitioner if so adviced may take recourse of Section 34 of Arbitration and C