JUDGMENT : Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. 1. Heard Shri Akhtar Ali, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Pawan Kumar Mishra holding brief of Shri Pranjal Mehrotra for the respondent no. 2 and Shri Pradeep Kumar Tripahti, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 3 & 4. 2. In proceedings for acquisition of land initiated under the National Highways Act, 1956 an award dated 22.6.2013 was made by the Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Ghaziabad/Competent Authority. Raising a grievance against amount determined by the competent authority, a reference was made at the behest of the petitioner for arbitration before the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad registered as Arbitration Case No. 2352 of 2015, and vide order dated 28.3.2017 the learned Arbitrator passed an award enhancing the rate to Rs. 1335/- per square meter. 3. At this stage an application under Section 33(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is said to have been filed by the petitioner for recalling the award dated 28.3.2017 passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Arbitration Case No. 2352/2015 and making a request for passing an additional arbitral award. The said application came to be rejected by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad vide order dated 24.9.2018, and thereafter the present petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 24.9.2018 passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad by asserting that the claim made by the petitioner for enhancement of compensation based upon the prevalent circle rate and the other developments in the area and also the legal provisions have not been considered by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad while deciding the application filed under Section 33(4) of the Act of 1996. 4. The learned Standing Counsel as well as the counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 have supported the order passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad and have further submitted that in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the award he has an efficacious remedy available to him under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 5. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, the relevant statutory provisions may be referred to. 6. 2 have supported the order passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad and have further submitted that in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the award he has an efficacious remedy available to him under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 5. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, the relevant statutory provisions may be referred to. 6. Under the National Highways Act, 1956 (Act No. 48 of 1956), the determination of the amount payable as compensation is to be made under sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 3G of the said Act, and in a case where the amount determined by the competent authority under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government. Further, in terms of sub-section (6) of Section 3G of the National Highways Act, 1956, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are to apply to every arbitration under the National Highways Act, 1956. For ease of reference, Section 3G of Act No. 48 of 1956 is being reproduced below : "3G. Determination of amount payable as compensation.-(1) Where any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid an amount which shall be determined by an order of the competent authority. (2) Where the right of user or any right in the nature of an easement on, any land is acquired under this Act, there shall be paid an amount to the owner and any other person whose right of enjoyment in that land has been affected in any manner whatsoever by reason of such acquisition an amount calculated at ten per cent. of the amount determined under sub-section (1), for that land. (3) Before proceeding to determine the amount under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the competent authority shall give a public notice published in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons interested in the land to be acquired. of the amount determined under sub-section (1), for that land. (3) Before proceeding to determine the amount under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the competent authority shall give a public notice published in two local newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular language inviting claims from all persons interested in the land to be acquired. (4) Such notice shall state the particulars of the land and shall require all persons interested in such land to appear in person or by an agent or by a legal practitioner referred to in sub-section (2) of section 3C, before the competent authority, at a time and place and to state the nature of their respective interest in such land. (5) If the amount determined by the competent authority under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is not acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall, on an application by either of the parties, be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government. (6) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply to every arbitration under this Act. (7) The competent authority or the arbitrator while determining the amount under sub-section (1) or sub-section (5), as the case may be, shall take into consideration- (a) the market value of the land on the date of publication of the notification under section 3A; (b) the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at the time of taking possession of the land, by reason of the severing of such land from other land; (c) the damage, if any, sustained by the person interested at the time of taking possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other immovable property in any manner, or his earnings; (d) if, in consequences of the acquisition of the land, the person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business, the reasonable expenses, if any, incidental to such change." 7. In the present case, an award dated 22.6.2013 was made by the Competent Authority/Additional District Magistrate (Land Acquisition), Ghaziabad determining the amount payable as compensation under sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 3G of the Act 1956 and subsequently upon a reference sought by the petitioner under sub-section (5) of Section 3G the amount was redetermined by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad/Arbitrator vide an award dated 28.3.2017. Against the aforesaid award, an application under Section 33(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was preferred by the petitioner which came to be rejected vide order dated 24.9.2018 passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad. 8. Section 33 of the Act of 1996 is with regard to correction and interpretation of award and making of an additional award. For ready reference, Section 33 of the Act 1996 is being reproduced below: "33. Correction and interpretation of award; additional award.-(1) Within thirty days from the receipt of the arbitral award, unless another period of time has been agreed upon by the parties,- (a) a party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to correct any computation errors, any clerical or typographical errors or any other errors of a similar nature occurring in the award; (b) if so agreed by the parties, a party, with notice to the other party, may request the arbitral tribunal to give an interpretation of a specific point or part of the award. (2) If the arbitral tribunal considers the request made under sub-section (1) to be justified, it shall make the correction or give the interpretation within thirty days from the receipt of the request and the interpretation shall form part of the arbitral award. (3) The arbitral tribunal may correct any error of the type referred to in Clause (a) of sub-section (1), on its own initiative, within thirty days from the date of the arbitral award. (4) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, a party with notice to the other party, may request, within thirty days from the receipt of the arbitral award, the arbitral tribunal to make an additional arbitral award as to claims presented in the arbitral proceedings, but omitted from the arbitral award. (5) If the arbitral tribunal considers the request made under sub-section (4) to be justified, it shall make the additional arbitral award within sixty days from the receipt of such request. (5) If the arbitral tribunal considers the request made under sub-section (4) to be justified, it shall make the additional arbitral award within sixty days from the receipt of such request. (6) The arbitral tribunal may extend, if necessary, the period of time within which it shall make a correction, give an interpretation or make an additional arbitral award under sub-section (2) or sub-section (5). (7) Section 31 shall apply to a correction or interpretation of the arbitral award or to an additional arbitral award made under this section." 9. The petitioner in the present case had invoked the provisions contained under sub-section (4) of Section 33 of the Act 1996 whereunder the arbitral tribunal is empowered to make an additional arbitral award as to the claims presented in arbitral proceedings but omitted from the arbitral award. The scope of Section 33(4) is thus limited to a case where certain claims have been presented in the arbitral proceedings, but they have been omitted from the arbitral award. The powers under Section 33(4), cannot be invoked for raising fresh claims or seeking an appeal against the arbitral award. The powers of the Arbitral Tribunal in these proceedings are restricted to making an award for such claims which formed a matter for adjudication and on which the parties had led arguments but the Arbitral Tribunal inadvertently omitted to make an award in respect of those claims. The provisions for making an additional award cannot be invoked for raising new points which had not been subject matter of the earlier reference. 10. The ambit and scope of sub-section (4) of Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was considered by the Supreme Court in Mcdermott International Inc. Vs. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and others, (2006) 11 SCC 181 , and it was held as follows : "71. Section 33 of the Act empowers the Arbitral Tribunal to make correction of errors in arbitral award, to give interpretation of a specific point or a part of the arbitral award, and to make an additional award as to claims, though presented in the arbitral proceedings, but omitted from the arbitral award. Sub-section (4) empowers the Arbitral Tribunal to make additional arbitral award in respect of claims already presented to the Tribunal in the arbitral proceedings but omitted by the Arbitral Tribunal provided: 1. Sub-section (4) empowers the Arbitral Tribunal to make additional arbitral award in respect of claims already presented to the Tribunal in the arbitral proceedings but omitted by the Arbitral Tribunal provided: 1. there is no contrary agreement between the parties to the reference; 2. a party to the reference, with notice to the other party to the reference, requests the Arbitral Tribunal to make the additional award; 3. such request is made within thirty days from the receipt of the arbitral award; 4. The Arbitral Tribunal considers the request so made justified; and 5. additional arbitral award is made within sixty days from the receipt of such request by the Arbitral Tribunal." 11. In the present case, the counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out the claims which had been presented in the arbitral proceedings but have been omitted from the arbitral award, so as to bring his case within the purview of Section 33(4). Further, the counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any legal error or perversity in the order dated 24.9.2018 passed by the Arbitrator/District Magistrate, Ghaziabad rejecting the application filed under Section 33(4) of the Act 1996. 12. The recourse against an arbitral award is by way of filing an application for setting aside the arbitral award in terms of Section 34 of the Act of 1996, which runs as follows: "34. Application for setting aside arbitral award.-(1) Recourse to a Court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside such award in accordance with sub-section (2) and sub-section (3). Application for setting aside arbitral award.-(1) Recourse to a Court against an arbitral award may be made only by an application for setting aside such award in accordance with sub-section (2) and sub-section (3). (2) An arbitral award may be set aside by the Court only if- (a) the party making the application furnishes proof that- (i) a party was under some incapacity, or (ii) the arbitration agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have subjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law for the time being in force; or (iii) the party making the application was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case; or (iv) the arbitral award deals with a dispute not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration: Provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated from those not so submitted, only that part of the arbitral award which contains decisions on matters not submitted to arbitration may be set aside; or (v) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties, unless such agreement was in conflict with a provision of this Part from which the parties cannot derogate, or, failing such agreement, was not in accordance with this Part; or (b) the Court finds that,- (i) the subject-matter of the dispute is not capable of settlement by arbitration under the law for the time being in force, or (ii) the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India. Explanation.-Without prejudice to the generality of sub-clause (ii), it is hereby declared, for the avoidance of any doubt, that an award is in conflict with the public policy of India if the making of the award was induced or affected by fraud or corruption or was in violation of Section 75 or Section 81. Explanation.-Without prejudice to the generality of sub-clause (ii), it is hereby declared, for the avoidance of any doubt, that an award is in conflict with the public policy of India if the making of the award was induced or affected by fraud or corruption or was in violation of Section 75 or Section 81. (3) An application for setting aside may not be made after three months have elapsed from the date on which the party making that application had received the arbitral award or, if a request had been made under Section 33, from the date on which that request had been disposed of by the arbitral tribunal: Provided that if the Court is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application within the said period of three months it may entertain the application within a further period of thirty days, but not thereafter. (4) On receipt of an application under sub-section (1), the Court may, where it is appropriate and it is so requested by a party, adjourn the proceedings for a period of time determined by it in order to give the arbitral tribunal an opportunity to resume the arbitral proceedings or to take such other action as in the opinion of arbitral tribunal will eliminate the grounds for setting aside the arbitral award." 13. Taking note of the provisions contained under Section 34 of the Act 1996 we may observe that it is open for the petitioner to agitate the grounds available to him under law by filing an appropriate application to avail the statutory remedy under Section 34. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute the aforesaid legal position. 15. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. 16. The writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to have recourse to the remedy available to him under law.