Patna High Court
Abhimanyu Kumar @ Abhimanu Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 1 August, 2024
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10915 of 2024
======================================================
1. Abhimanyu Kumar @ Abhimanu Kumar, Son of Ram Kishore Sharam, R/o
village- Bagodar, Block- Hisua, P.S.- Hisua, District- Nawada.
2. Neeraj Kumar, Son of Ram Kishore Sharam, R/o village- Bagodar, Block-
Hisua, P.S.- Hisua, District- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.
2. The Commissioner-cum-Arbitrator under the National Highway Act, 1956,
Magadh Division, Gaya.
3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Nawada.
4. The District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority, N.H. Act
Nawada.
5. The National Highway Authority of India through the Project Director,
Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D. Yadav, A AG-9
Mr. Braj Bhushan Mishra, AC to AAG-9
For the NHAI : Dr. Iti Suman, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-08-2024
Heard Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned Advocate
for the petitioners, Dr.Iti Suman, learned Advocate for the
National Highway Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as
'the NHAI') and Mr. Braj Bhushan Mishra, learned counsel for
the State.
2. The petitioners by invoking the prerogative writ
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking a direction upon the respondent no.4, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.10915 of 2024 dt.01-08-2024
District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority,
National Highways Act, Nawada to ensure compliance of the
order/direction dated 04.08.2023 passed in Arbitration Case No.
551 of 2018 by the learned Arbitrator-cum-Commissioner,
Magadh Division, Gaya whereby the learned Arbitrator has
directed to compute the compensation of the land of the
petitioners treating the same as residential.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioners contended
that despite the direction being issued by the learned Arbitrator
way back on 04.08.2023, till date the respondent no.4 is sitting
tight over the matter and computation has not been made,
compelling the petitioners to approach this Court.
4. At the outset, learned Advocate for the NHAI
made preliminary objection that the order passed by the learned
Arbitrator is an award and, as such, it is enforceable under
Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1996'). In view of the
statutory remedy available for execution of an arbitral award,
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not
lie is the contention of the learned Advocate for the NHAI.
5. In support of the aforenoted contention, reliance
has also been placed on a judgment rendered by the Division
Patna High Court CWJC No.10915 of 2024 dt.01-08-2024
Bench of this Court in the case of the Project Director
National Highway Authority, Araria at Purnea Vs. Md.
Gufran Alam & Ors, reported in 2014 (1) PLJR 207.
6. At this juncture, learned Advocate for the
petitioners drew the attention of this Court to the award passed
by the learned Arbitrator, the copy of which is marked as
Annexure-1. Referring thereto, it is contended that there is a
direction for computation of quantum of compensation of the
land by treating the land of the petitioners as residential and, as
such, it is only a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer,
Nawada and cannot be treated as an award.
7. The submission of the petitioners is wholly
misconceived.
8. Having considered the rival contention of the
parties and taking note of the fact that the order of the learned
Arbitrator is by way of an award under the National Highways
Act, 1956 and for enforcement of the award, the petitioners have
statutory remedy available under Section 36 of the Act, 1996,
which provides for enforcement of arbitral award under the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in the same manner as it was a
decree of the Court.
9. The issue raised before this Court has also been
Patna High Court CWJC No.10915 of 2024 dt.01-08-2024
considered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of
Md. Gufran Alam (Supra) wherein the learned Division Bench
of this Court, while setting aside the order of the learned Single
Judge has held as follows:
"8. We may look to the certain
provisions of the Act of 1956 and the Act of
1996 which are relevant for resolution of
dispute before us. Section 3-G of the Act of
1956 provides for determination of amount of
compensation by the Competent Authority.
Sub-section (5) thereof empowers either of the
parties aggrieved by the award of the
Competent Authority to seek arbitration
against such award. Sub-section (6) of Section
3-G of the said Act provides that the
proceeding before the Arbitrator shall be
regulated by the provisions contained in the
Act of 1956. Section 3-H of the Act of 1956
provides for deposit and payment of amount.
Sub-section (1) thereof provides for deposit of
the amount of compensation with the
Competent Authority. Sub- section (2) thereof
provides for payment of the amount to the
claimants. Sub-section (6) thereof provides for
deposit of the amount of difference in
compensation awarded by the Arbitrator. It is
this sub-section (6) which is pressed into
service by the writ petitioner.
9. As recorded hereinabove, the
proceedings before the Arbitrator are
Patna High Court CWJC No.10915 of 2024 dt.01-08-2024
governed by the Act of 1996. Section 34 of the
Act of 1996 provides for a remedy against the
arbitral award by an application for setting
aside the arbitral award before the Court. The
"Court" is defined under Clause (e) of sub-
section (1) of Section 2 of the Act of 1996 to
mean, "the principal civil Court of original
jurisdiction in a district, and includes the High
Court in exercise of its ordinary original civil
jurisdiction, having jurisdiction to decide the
questions forming the subject-matter of the
arbitration if the same had been the subject-
matter of a suit, but does not include any civil
Court of a grade inferior to such principal
civil Court, or any Court of Small Causes."
Hence, it is evident that the remedy against the
arbitral award lies before the civil Court.
Section 36 of the Act of 1996 provides for
enforcement of the arbitral award under the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in the same
manner as if it were a decree of the Court.
Thus, the statutory remedy for enforcement of
the arbitral award made under Section 3-G (5)
of the Act of 1956 lies before the civil Court."
10. In view of the aforesaid facts and the position
obtaining in law, the writ petition stands disposed of with a
liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedy as provided under
Section 36 of the Act, 1996 for enforcement of award, as passed
by the learned Arbitrator.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10915 of 2024 dt.01-08-2024
11. The jurisdictional court shall expedite the
matter at the earliest.
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 02.08.2024
Transmission Date NA
