An appeal under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation Act cannot challenge awards issued under the National Highways Act, 1956.

JUDGMENT

This is an appeal filed under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 . The challenge is against an award dated 04.11.2025 rendered by the District Collector, Kollam, in his capacity as the Arbitrator under the National Highways Act, 1956 . Property of the appellants' predecessor was acquired for the purpose of widening of National Highway. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the Competent Authority under the NH Act, the matter was further taken up in accordance with law to the Arbitrator, who passed the impugned award.

2. Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 reads as under:-

“74. Appeal to High Court.–(1) The Requiring Body or any person aggrieved by the Award passed by an Authority under section 69 may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of Award:

Provided that the High Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days.

(2) Every appeal referred to under sub-section (1) shall be heard as expeditiously as possible and endeavour shall be made to dispose of such appeal within six months from the date on which the appeal is presented to the High Court.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, “High Court” means the High Court within the jurisdiction of which the land acquired or proposed to be acquired is situated.”

3. A reading of the above provision would show that the appeal under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 to the High Court would lie only from an award passed by an Authority under Section 69 of the Act. The Authority is defined under Section 3(f) of the Act. The expression “authority” means the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority established under Section 51.

4. The award under challenge in this appeal is passed by the Arbitrator under the National Highways Act, 1956 . As noted above, appeal to the High Court under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 would lie only against an award passed by an Authority under the said Act. When this was pointed out to the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel argued that the provisions of the Act of 2013 would apply to acquisitions under the National Highways Act also, and therefore, the appellate remedy under the Act can be invoked by a person aggrieved by an award passed by the Arbitrator under the National Highways Act.

5. This argument is totally misguided. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various authoritative pronouncements, the procedure for land acquisition under the National Highways Act is governed by the provisions of the said Act. The purpose and object of providing special provisions under the National Highways Act for land acquisition is to make land available for construction and development of national highways swiftly and to provide a special procedure for the said purpose. As discernible from Section 3G(6) of the National Highways Act, provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act shall apply to every arbitration under it. The award impugned in this appeal is passed by an Arbitrator under the National Highways Act, 1956 . Therefore, the further remedy of the appellants is as provided under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 . They cannot be permitted to deviate and approach this Court, invoking the appellate jurisdiction under the Right to Fai