Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 19-Feb-2025 17:22:45 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ARBA No.10 of 2024 Along with ARBA No.6 of 2024 (IN ARBA No.10 of 2024)

(From the Judgment dated 23.2.2024 passed by the Ld. District Judge, Cuttack in Arbitration Petition No.15 of 2019 arising out of award dated 22.5.2019 passed by the Ld. Collector & District Magistrate Cum Sole Arbitrator in ARB Misc. Case No. 1 of 2016)

Project Director, NHAI, PIU, …. Appellant (s)

Bhubaneswar & Another -versus-

Prakash Kumar Rout …. Respondent (s)

Advocates appeared in the case throughHybrid Mode:

Appellant (s) : Mr.Ajit Patnaik, Adv. Respondent (s) : Mr. M. K. Mishra, Sr. Adv.

Along with Mr. J. Katikia, Adv.

(IN ARBA No.6 of 2024)

(From the Judgment dated 23.2.2024 passed by the Ld. District Judge, Cuttack in Arbitration Petition No.16 of 2019 arising out of award dated 22.5.2019 passed by the Ld. Collector & District Magistrate Cum Sole Arbitrator in ARB Misc. Case No. 1 of 2016)

Prakash Kumar Rout …. Appellant (s)

-versus-

National Highways Authority of …. Respondent (s)

India and Anr.

Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 19-Feb-2025 17:22:45 Advocates appeared in the case throughHybrid Mode:

Appellant (s) : Mr. M. K. Mishra, Sr. Adv.

Along with Mr. J. Katikia, Adv.

Respondent (s) : Mr.Ajit Patnaik, Adv.

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI DATE OF HEARING:-20.01.2025 DATE OF JUDGMENT: -14.02.2025 Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. Both the Appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‚A&C Act‛) have been filed against the common judgment dated 23.2.2024 passed by the Ld. District Judge, Cuttack in Arbitration Petition No. 15 of 2019 arising out of award dated 22.5.2019 passed by the Ld. Collector & District Magistrate Cum Sole Arbitrator in ARB Misc. Case No. 1 of 2016. As both Appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment and raise the same questions of law, it is considered prudent to deal with them together. Hereinafter, the parties are referred to as their original position in the arbitration for the sake of convenience.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. For the sake of brevity, the admitted facts involved in the appeals are pithily discussed herein:

Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 19-Feb-2025 17:22:45 i. The Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi issued a Notification u/s 3A of the NH Act, 1956 vide S.O. No. 679(E) dated 13.3.2013 for the purpose of expansion of national highways expressing intention to acquire land for construction (widening/six-laning), maintenance, management and operation of N.H.16 (old N.H.5) on the stretch of land from 414 km to 419.2km (Bhubaneswar – Kolkata Section).

ii. The Notification dated 13.3.2013 was also published in widely circulated local Newspapers namely, ‚the Samaj‛ and ‚the Sambad‛ on 3.4.2013 inviting objections u/s 3(C) of the NH Act, 1956 within 21 days.

iii. The Claimant herein filed his Objection on 23.4.2014 requesting the authorities to exempt his plots from acquisition as he was running a cattle-feed plant on the plots belonging to him that were sought to be acquired. Upon consideration of his prayer, out of 7 plots of land originally notified to be acquired, 4 plots were exempted from acquisition on which he was running the said plant. The remaining 3 plots could not be exempted as they were found to be adjacent to the National Highways and were found to be inevitable for acquisition for the proposed expansion. The reason they were excluded was allegedly that it was found that there were no installations of plant or machinery on the non-exempted plots which would have any adverse effect on his plant/industry.

iv. Thereafter, on 10.5.2014, vide S.O. No. 729(E), Notification u/s 3(D)

of the NH Act, 1956 was published for final acquisition of land.

Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 19-Feb-2025 17:22:45 Thereafter, it is