WPMS/2135/2018
2021 Latest Caselaw 2009 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
           AT NAINITAL
        ON THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2021
                         BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
       Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2135 of 2018
BETWEEN:

Kulwant Singh                           ...Petitioner

     (By Mr. Pankaj Tangwan, Advocate)

AND:

Union of India & others                 ...Respondents

     (By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Additional C.S.C. for the State of
     Uttarakhand, Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Central
     Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India and
     Mr. Naresh Pant, learned counsel for the NHAI.)


                       JUDGMENT

1. Petitioner's land was acquired by National Highway Authority of India for construction of National Highway. The Competent Authority Land Acquisition / Special Land Acquisition Officer, Udham Singh Nagar determined the amount payable as compensation to the petitioner vide order dated 26.08.2015.

2. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought following relief:-

(i) Issue a order or direction for setting aside the impugned order dated 26.08.2015, so far as it relates to the land and buildings of the petitioner.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to follow the provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Tranparency in Land Acquisition,

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for acquisition of land for the purpose of National Highway no. 125 in district - U.S. Nagar.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to give the compensation for acquiring land (Gata no. 11) of the petitioner along with interest as per the provision of The Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

3. From the relief clause of the writ petition, it is revealed that petitioner has thrown challenge to the order passed by the Competent Authority Land Acquisition. Under the scheme of the National Highways Act, 1956, petitioner has a Statutory remedy under Section 3G(5) by way of approaching the Arbitrator.

4. Since petitioner has the remedy to approach before the Arbitrator, therefore, the relief, as claimed in the writ petition, cannot be granted.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Arbitrator, within two weeks from today. If petitioner approaches the Arbitrator within stipulated time, the Arbitrator shall decide the matter on merits, as early as possible, but not later than twelve months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Aswal