Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 509 (MP)

Ramesh Rao v. Union of India

2014-05-05

R.S.JHA

body2014
ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by the award dated 18.2.2013 passed in Case No.01/A82/2011-12 under the National Highways Act, 1956. 3. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the award, possession has been taken over however it is alleged that the manner of assessment of compensation is erroneous as the parameters as provided under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act have not been considered while determining the same. 4. The counsel for petitioners submits that the provisions of section 3-G of the Act have been declared unconstitutional by some other High Courts and in such circumstances, the petition be entertained. 5. Respondents have filed a reply and have stated that the petitioners have an alternative statutory efficacious remedy of approaching the Arbitrator, if they are aggrieved by the assessment of compensation made by the competent authority. Respondents rely upon a decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kanhaiyalal Patel v. Union of India and others ILR 2008 MP 1932 wherein this Court has held that an award passed under the Act can be assailed only before the Arbitrator. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties on the objection regarding maintainability, it is apparent that in view of the decision in the case of Kanhaiyalal Patel (supra), the petitioners have an alternative statutory efficacious remedy against the award by taking up all issues regarding inadequacy of compensation before the statutory arbitrator. 7. Learned counsel appearing for National Highways Authority submits that issues raised by the petitioners shall be considered by the Arbitrator. It is also undisputed that this Court has not declared any provision ultra-vires or unconstitutional. 8. In view of the aforesaid and the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court, the petition filed by petitioners is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the respondentsauthorities by assailing the impugned award. It goes without saying that in case the petitioners do so within a period of 15 days along with copy of order passed today, the concerned authority shall entertain the claim of the petitioners and decide it on merits and shall not dismiss it only on the ground of limitation. 9. With the aforesaid observations, the petition filed by the petitioners stands disposed of. 10. Interim order granted on 30.8.2014 stands vacated.