Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Subhas Chandra Bose & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 January, 2023
15
18.01.2023
Ct. No.10
b.das
W.P.A. 1885 of 2018
Subhas Chandra Bose & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Samim Ahammed
Ms. Ambiya Khatun ...for the petitioners.
Mr. Soumitra Bandyopadhyay
Mr. Subhasis Bandyopadhyay ...for the State.
Mr. Dipankar Das ...for NHAI.
Heard learned counsels for the parties.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the
land of the petitioners was acquired by a notification issued
under Section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 for
the purpose of expansion of National Highway-34 and
being unhappy with the compensation granted by the
authority, the petitioners approached the learned
Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways
Act, 1956. No opportunity of hearing was granted to the
petitioners by the learned Arbitrator and the arbitral award
also was not communicated to the petitioners.
The petitioners have sought liberty to submit a fresh
application under Section 3G (5) of the Act of 1956 before
the learned Arbitrator for consideration of enhancement of
the compensation amount declared in their favour and also
for consideration of the same in terms of Right to Fair
2
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed
reliance on a judgment of an Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court passed on 7th September, 2022 in MAT 1520 of 2019
with IA CAN 2 of 2021.
It is submitted on behalf of the National Highway
Authority of India that the arbitral award has been
challenged by the authority before the District Court being
AMC 176 of 2017, which is pending.
Learned counsel for the State respondents submits
that the petitioners may make an application under Section
3G(5) of the Act of 1956 before the Arbitrator, who shall
decide the same in accordance with the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 as well as the Act of 2013.
It has been observed by the Hon'ble Division Bench
in the judgment referred to earlier that in the event the
petitioners are not granted an opportunity of hearing before
the learned Arbitrator, the petitioners cannot be said to be
bound by the order passed by the Arbitrator and are at
liberty to file a fresh application under Section 3G(5) of the
Act of 1956.
In view of the above, this Court is inclined to hold
that since the petitioners are admittedly entitled to
compensation under the Act of 2013, they may be granted
liberty to file an application under Section 3G(5) of the Act
of 1956 before the learned Arbitrator appointed under the
Act within one month from date.
The learned Arbitrator shall consider the applications
submitted by the petitioners in accordance with the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as well as the Act of
2013 upon giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to all
the interested persons including the petitioners, in
accordance with law and complete the entire exercise
within six months from the date of filing of the applications
by the petitioners.
Copy of the arbitral award be served upon the
petitioners within a month thereafter.
With the above observations and directions this writ
petition being WPA 1885 of 2018 is disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained
in the petition are deemed not to be admitted.
Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied
for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all
requisite formalities.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.)
