TOSIUR RAHAMAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition appears to be in derogation of the procedure specified under Section 3-G of the National Highways Act, 1956. The petitioners are dissatisfied with the amount determined by the competent authority as compensation payable to the petitioners upon their land being acquired for the purpose of a national highway. Section 3G(5) mandates that if the amount determined by the competent authority "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." Section 3G(6) of the Act expressly makes the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applicable to every arbitration under the said Act of 1956.

(2.) The present petition is misconceived since it does not appear that any request for the appointment of an arbitrator has been made by the petitioners in accordance with Section 3G(5) of the said Act of 1956. The petitioners rely on a copy of a document appearing as Annexure P/2 to the petition which has been received by the Office of the District Magistrate, Murshidabad. According to the petitioners, since the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition) is also the competent authority to adjudicate upon the amount of compensation payable, it would suffice to send a request to such person for an arbitrator to be appointed.

(3.) Section 3G(5) of the said Act of 1956 provides for the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government. Since the petitioners' grievance is that the arbitrator has not been appointed despite request, it is first necessary to ascertain whether a proper request has been made for such request to be taken cognizance of. Next, it must be ascertained whether this is the remedy for the petitioners upon the Central Government not appointing an arbitrator in terms of Section 3G(5) of the said Act of 1956.