Patna High Court
Manisha BhaskarversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner must seek relief by filing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Principal Civil Court.
Summary
Manisha Bhaskar purchased a 0.29 decimal plot of land in 2016 and later the land was acquired by the government under a Gazette Notification pursuant to the National Highways Act, 1956. She was paid Rs. 5,05,432 as compensation, although the Act stipulated a higher amount of Rs. 8,86,022, prompting her to seek enhanced compensation through an arbitration proceeding under Section 3(G)(5) of the NH Act. The arbitrator rejected her claim, applying an agricultural rate of Rs. 5,000 per decimal despite the land’s commercial character. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the arbitrator’s award, but the High Court held that the award is subject to challenge only under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Principal Civil Court. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed, with liberty granted to approach the appropriate civil court for relief.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ court can entertain a challenge to an arbitrator’s award made under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.
- Whether the petitioner’s remedy lies under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Principal Civil Court.
Legislation cited
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 34
- National Highways Act, 1956 — s. 3(G)(5)
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- National Highways Act
- arbitration award
- Section 34 Arbitration Act
- writ jurisdiction
- commercial land valuation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.663 of 2026
======================================================
Manisha Bhaskar Wife of Kanak Kishore Bhaskar, Resident of Colony No.- 1,
Durga Asthan, P.S.- Katihar, Dist.-Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Road, Transport, and
Highway Authority of India, New Delhi.
2. The Secretary, Ministry of Road, Transport, and Highway Authority of India,
New Delhi.
3. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Addl. Chief Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Divisional Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea.
7. The Project Director National Highway Authority of India, (Project
Implementation Unit, Purnea) in the house of Sri Sikandar Singh near
Mahananda Colony, Sahaban hata, P.S.- K. Hat, Dist.- Purnea.
8. The Competent Authority Cum Land Acquisition Officer, Katihar, 1st Floor,
Samaharnalay Bhawan, katihar, Dist.- Katihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Adv.
Mrs. Shrishti Rani, Advocate
For the Respondent/state : Mr. Dhurjatti Kr. Prasad, Government Pleader 14
Mr. Anshay Bahadur Mathur, C.G.C.
For the N.H.A.I. : Dr. Anand Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Rajan Prakash, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-01-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application
being aggrieved by the order dated 27.11.2024 passed by
learned Divisional Commissioner, Purnea in Arbitration Case
No. 129 of 2022 by which the claim of the petitioner for
Patna High Court CWJC No.663 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
2/4
enhanced compensation has been rejected.
3. Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner submits that petitioner purchased a piece of land
situated at Mauza - Routara, Thana No. 152 , Khata No. 570,
Plot No. 648 having an area of 0.29 decimal by virtue of sale
deed no. 3924 on 14.03.2016 at the rate of Rs. 1,20,000/- per
decimal. Gazette Notification No. 465 dated 03.02.2021 was
issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. The
aforesaid land was acquired by virtue of aforesaid gazette
notification and as per the National Highways Act, 1956 (for
short “the N.H. Act”) the petitioner was to be paid compensation
of Rs. 8,86,022 /- which the petitioner accepted, however, Rs.
5,05,432/- only as compensation amount has been credited in
the account of the petitioner. Being dissatisfied with the
compensation amount and the valuation of the land, the
petitioner filed an application before the Divisional
Commissioner -cum- Arbitrator, Purnea Division under Section
3(G)(5) of the N.H. Act, which was registered as Arbitration
Case No. 129 of 2022 on 24.06.2022. It has further been argued
that the learned Arbitrator did not consider the claim of the
petitioner in proper perspective inasmuch as the land in question
was purchased by the petitioner on 14.03.2016 at the rate of
Patna High Court CWJC No.663 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
3/4
Rs. 1,20,000/- per decimal for which total stamp duty of
Rs. 2,08,800/- was paid. The land is falling in the category of
commercial area and near the land Routara Police Station is
functioning and there is a growing market, petrol pump, cold
storage etc. near the land of the petitioner. It has further been
submitted that MVR of the subject land was fixed at
Rs. 1,00,000/- per decimal for commercial and Rs. 5,000/- for
agricultural. The compensation amount of the petitioner has
been calculated at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- considering the nature
of land as agricultural. Before fixing the valuation, assessment
by Six Men Committee was not done, however, the Arbitrator
failed to take into consideration all the relevant points taken by
the petitioner during the course of argument.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the N.H. as well
as State argued that the award / order passed by the Arbitrator
can be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996. Against the award of the Arbitrator the
petitioner has the remedy before the Principal Civil Court under
Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking
into consideration the fact that the order impugned is in the
nature of award passed by the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of
Patna High Court CWJC No.663 of 2026(2) dt.27-01-2026
4/4
the N.H. Act, accordingly, this writ application is disposed with
liberty to the petitioner to file a petition before the Principal
Civil Court / concerned court. If such an application is filed
along with limitation petition, the Principal Civil Court /
concerned court shall consider the same in accordance with law.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U
Checking your session…