SHREERAM KESHRI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order as contained in memo no. 1611 dtd. 15/9/2021 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 3 - the Additional Collector-cum-Arbitrator under the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1956") in Misc. Case No. 11/2021, whereby the petitioner's objection raised under Sec. 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 against determination of compensation for acquisition of the land in question has been rejected.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the respondent no. 3, vide impugned order dtd. 15/9/2021, while rejecting the petitioner's claim for enhancement of compensation, has not considered the provisions of Sec. 3-G(7)(a) and (d) of the said Act.

(3.) Ms. Soumya S. Pandey, AC to AAG-I appearing on behalf of the State respondents as well as Mrs. Sweety Topno, learned counsel for the respondent-NHAI, jointly raise preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition and submit that the impugned order dtd. 15/9/2021 passed by the respondent no. 3 under Sec. 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 can only be challenged under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1996"). In support of the said submission, learned counsel for the respondents refer to order dtd. 9/5/2022 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 4438 of 2021 [Basant Kumar Gupta Vs. The State of Jharkhand and Ors.], the relevant paragraphs of which read as under: