Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________ vs Union Of India & Ors on 1 January, 2024
Author: Sushil Kukreja
Bench: Sushil Kukreja
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Arb. Case No.953 of 2023
.
Date of Decision: 01.01.2024
_____________________________________________________________
Sourav & Anr.
...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors.
...Respondents
of
______________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge
rt
Whether approved for reporting?1
__________________________________________________________
For the Petitioners : Mr. Y.P. Sood, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. V.B. Verma, CGSC., for
respondent No.1.
Ms. Shreya Chauhan, Advocate,
for respondent No.2/NHAI.
Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate
General, with Mr. Raj Kumar Negi,
Additional Advocate General, for
respondents No.3 and 4/State.
___________________________________________________________
Sushil Kukreja, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Mr. V.B Verma, learned Central
Government Standing Counsel, Ms. Shreya Chauhan,
Advocate and Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, learned Additional
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Advocate General, appear and waive service of notice on
behalf of respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively.
.
2. In the present petition, a prayer has been made
by the petitioners to extend the time for completion of the
arbitral proceedings in Arbitration Case No.418/2018,
before the learned Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, District
of
Shimla, H.P., exercising the powers of Arbitrator under
Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956.
rt
3. The arbitral dispute has arisen out of the land
acquisition in District Shimla, H.P. for the purpose of
construction of the National Highway, land for which has
been acquired under the provisions of National Highways
Act, 1956. The land of the petitioners has been acquired in
the present case vide Award No. 21, dated 12.10.2015 and
Supplementary Award No.21, dated 05.03.2018.
4. Feeling aggrieved by the award passed by the
competent authority, the landowners have preferred
Arbitration Case No.418/2018, before the learned
Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, and non-
adjudication of the arbitral proceedings within the statutory
period has resulted in filing of the instant petition.
.
5. The Reference Petition against the Award was filed
by the land owner long back. According to the petitioner,
repeated adjournments were granted by the learned
Arbitrator without caring for the time period and mandate
of
under Section 29A of the Act, which resulted in unnecessary
delay in the announcement of the award by the learned
rt
Arbitrator, i.e. the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla, District
Shimla, H.P.
6. This Court has gone through the material
available on record carefully and finds that the proceedings
have been conducted by the learned Arbitrator in violation of
statutory provisions, as contained in the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996. This Court is of the view that when a
statute envisages an authority, be it an Arbitrator, to do a
particular act in a particular manner and in a prescribed
time schedule, then the onus is upon the said
authority/Arbitrator to perform the task entrusted to it
within the time schedule prescribed in the statute. The
delay, if any, has to be bonafide and explainable. However,
in the present petition even after completion of the
.
pleadings, the matter was adjourned and on 05.04.2023, the
learned Arbitrator has closed the proceedings since the time
limit for arbitral proceedings to pass an award had elapsed.
7. However, at this stage, the Court is restraining
of
from making any further observation in the case save and
except that henceforth, if the Court finds the Arbitrator
rt
derelicting his duties, then it shall not hesitate to invoke its
powers as enshrined in Section 29 (A) (6) of the 1996 Act, to
terminate the mandate of the Arbitrator, dehors the fact that
the Arbitrator happens to be appointed in terms of the
notification issued by the Central Government under Section
3G (a) of the National Highways Act, 1956.
8. In view of the above discussion, the instant
petition is allowed and the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional
Commissioner, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., exercising the
powers of Arbitrator under Section 3 of the National
Highways Act, 1956 is directed to conclude the arbitral
proceedings and to pass the arbitral award in Arbitration
Case No.418/2018, on or before 1st July, 2024.
.
Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending
miscellaneous applications, if any.
( Sushil Kukreja )
January 01, 2024 Judge
of
(subhash)
rt
