SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 8048

PATNA HIGH COURT
Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha
Byash Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India and Ors – Respondent
CWJC/670/2018



Under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, a claim for enhancement of compensation for land acquired by the NHAI must be filed before the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government.

Headnote:

LAND ACQUISITION - COMPENSATION - ENHANCEMENT - ARBITRATION - SECTION 3-G(5) OF THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT, 1956

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner's land was acquired by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for the construction of a national highway. The petitioner was dissatisfied with the compensation amount offered by the NHAI and filed a petition before the District Land Acquisition Officer for enhancement of compensation.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner's claim for enhancement of compensation should be filed before the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.

Issues: Whether the petitioner's claim for enhancement of compensation should be filed before the District Land Acquisition Officer or the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 provides that if the amount of compensation determined by the competent authority is not acceptable to either party, the amount shall be determined by the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Government.

Final Decision: The court directed the petitioner to file his claim for enhancement of compensation before the Arbitrator within four weeks from the date of the order. The Arbitrator was directed to decide the claim within four months from the date of receipt of the claim.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.670 of 2018

======================================================

Byash Prasad Singh Son of Late Ygyanand Singh, resident of Village Dulma,

P.W. Circle- Madhuban, District- East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union Of India

2.

The Secretary Govt. of India Ministry of Road Transport of Highway, New

Delhi.

3.

National Highway Authority of India through its Project Director, Incharge

of N.H. 104, New Delhi.

4.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Revenue and Land

Reforms, Government of Bihar,

5.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar,

Patna.

6.

The District Magistrate cum Collector, East Champaran at Motihari.

7.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Pakari Dayal, East Champaran.

8.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, East Champaran at Motihari.

9.

The Circle Officer, Madhuban, East Champaran.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr.Raj Kishore Roy -Gp18

Mr. Navnit Kumar, AC to GP 18

For NHAI

:

Mr, S. N. Pathak

Mr. Saurav Nikunj

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA

ORAL ORDER

11

10-01-2023

The contention of the petitioner is that his land

bearing Khata No. 302, Plot No. 433, Mouja- Dulma, Thana No.

- 02, area 11 decimals, has been acquired by the National

Highways Authority of India (for short the “N.H.A.I.”) but

adequate compensation has not been granted to the petitioner

inasmuch instead of giving compensation at commercial rate,

the petitioner has been given compensation only treating his

Patna High Court CWJC No.670 of 2018(11) dt.10-01-2023

2/3

land as a residential land.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

compensation of the subject land acquired by the N.H.A.I. is not

adequate and for enhancement of the same the petitioner has

filed petition before the District Land Acquisition Officer, East

Champaran, at Motihari.

On the other hand, Mr. S.N. Pathak, learned counsel

appearing for the N.H.A.I. submits that as per Section 3-G(5) of

the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the

“N.H. Act”) “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 Central Government”. He next

submits that now the Central Government has notified

Divisional Commissioner of the area as Arbitrator under the

N.H. Act.

In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner is directed to

file his claim for enhancement of compensation amount as per

Section 3-G(5) of the N.H. Act before the Arbitrator i.e.

Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut, within a period of four weeks

from today.

Patna High Court CWJC No.670 of 2018(11) dt.10-01-2023

3/3

If such a claim is filed within the aforesaid time, the

learned Arbitrator shall decide the same in accordance with law

after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned and will

pass a reasoned order within a reasonable time period,

preferably within a period of four months from the date of

receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ

application is disposed of.

Prabhakar Anand/-

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)

U

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top