Himachal Pradesh High Court
Balak Ram vs National Highway Authority Of India And ... on 19 June, 2023
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CARBC No. 4 of 2019
.
Date of decision: 19.6.2023
Balak Ram. ...Petitioner.
Versus
National Highway Authority of India and others.
...Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Appellant. Mr.Romesh Verma, Senior Advocate,
alongwith Mr.Hitesh Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Ms.Shreya Chauhan, Advocate, for
respondent No. 1.
Mr.Prashant Sen, Deputy Advocate General,
for respondents No. 2 and 3.
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)
Present petition has been preferred by petitioner against award dated 8.2.2019 passed by respondent No. 2-Divisional Commissioner with respect to property of petitioner acquired for construction of four-lane road from Kiratpur-Nerchowk sections on National Highway No. 21, on the ground that in the award no amount of compensation has been determined for acquiring the structure of the petitioner and loss of business/income with further submission that so far as quantum of amount of compensation determined with respect to land is concerned, appropriate petition has been preferred for enhancement before District Judge, Bilaspur, as permissible under law. Further because no compensation was determined for the earning benefits from the Petrol Pump and structure acquired alongwith land, therefore, petitioner was compelled to file present petition.
2. In response to the petition, respondent No. 2 Divisional Commissioner, Exercising the powers of Arbitrator under the National Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes ::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2023 20:32:02 :::CIS 2 CARBC No. 4 of 2019 Highway Act, 1956 has filed affidavit, stating therein that award dated 8.2.2019 was passed with respect to land only and compensation with respect to income/business as well as structure of the petitioner was to be .
determined separately, but due to inadvertent mistake the said fact could not be mentioned in the impugned award and the file was consigned to the Record Room. It has been further submitted in the reply that now case file of the petitioner has been requisitioned for adjudicating the claim of the petitioner with respect to business losses as well as structure i.e. Petrol Pump and supplementary award in this regard shall be announced in due course of time.
3. In view of aforesaid facts placed on record in the reply of Divisional Commissioner-Arbitrator, nothing survives to be adjudicated, as prayer of the petitioner for adjudicating the quantum of compensation in his favour for business losses and acquisition of structure standing on the acquired land will be redressed by the Divisional Commissioner by passing appropriate award under relevant provisions of law.
4. At this stage, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that though Arbitrator was conducting the proceedings, however, after sending record to this Court, he has stopped the proceedings.
5. In view of above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the parties to appear before Divisional Commissioner-Arbitrator on 10th July, 2023, where after Divisional Commissioner-Arbitrator shall proceed further in accordance with law and shall make endeavor to decide the matter by passing appropriate award as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months thereafter. Needless to say that parties, if aggrieved by the award so passed by the Arbitrator, shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law.
6. Registry is directed to ensure transmission of record to Arbitrator henceforth.
::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2023 20:32:02 :::CIS 3 CARBC No. 4 of 2019
The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms, so also pending applications, if any.
.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), th 19 June, 2023 Judge.
(Keshav)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 20/06/2023 20:32:02 :::CIS