JUDGMENT : The present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 16.03.2020 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 4 - the District Land Acquisition Officer, Dhanbad-cum-Competent Authority under the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short, “the Act, 1956”) in Misc. Case No. 04/2019-20 whereby the petitioner’s application filed under Section 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 has been rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 3. The petitioner being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation fixed for acquisition of his land and structures, preferred a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No. 5709 of 2019 which was disposed of vide order dated 22.11.2019 directing the respondent no. 4 to dispose of the petitioner’s application filed under Section 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 in accordance with law, if not already disposed of, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said order. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a representation before the respondent no. 4 on which a notice dated 03.03.2020 was issued to him to appear before the said authority on 16.03.2020 who finally passed the impugned order on the said date. 4. On bare perusal of the impugned order passed by the respondent no. 4, it appears that he has misdirected himself in observing that since the compensation for land and structure has already been determined in accordance with the rules, no interference/change can be made by him in the award and accordingly the petitioner’s application has been rejected. The respondent no. 4 while passing the said order perhaps did not understand the scope of Section 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 which provides that if the amount determined by the competent authority under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of the said Section 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. Hence, it is clear that Section 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 does not empower the competent authority (the respondent no. 4 in the present case) to make any adjudication, rather on an application made by a person who is aggrieved with quantum of compensation fixed by an award, the said authority has to refer the same to the arbitrator who in the present case is the Additional Collector, Dhanbad (the respondent no. 4 in the present case) to make any adjudication, rather on an application made by a person who is aggrieved with quantum of compensation fixed by an award, the said authority has to refer the same to the arbitrator who in the present case is the Additional Collector, Dhanbad (the respondent no. 3). 5. Hence, the impugned order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the respondent no. 4 in Misc. Case No. 04/2019-20 cannot be sustained in law and the same is accordingly quashed. The respondent no. 4 is directed to refer the matter to the arbitrator - the respondent no. 3, under Section 3-G(5) of the Act, 1956 within a week from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.