1 / 4 2025:CGHC:49757 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 5198 of 2025 Kriparam Nishad S/o Late Shri Jaggu Ram Nishad Aged About 62 Years R/o Subhash Chowk Main Road Urla, Tah. And Dist.- Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Project Director National Highways Authority Of India, House No. 5196, Behind B T I College, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Tah And Dist. Raipur C.G. 2 - The Collector, Raipur, Dist- Raipur C.G. 3 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Ravindra Sharma & Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, Advocates For NHAI : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate For State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07/10/2025 2 / 4 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. The petitioner has been filed this writ petition on the following relief(s) : “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 & 3 to decide the representation/ applications of the petitioner and may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to release the fair compensation of the acquired land in the compliance of order passed by the learned arbitrator dated 27.12.2018 with interest from the date of acquisition of the land. 10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue any writ or direction of order as deem fit in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the land of the petitioner bearing Kh. No. 278/15, area 1540 sq. meter, situated at Vill- Urla, Tah. & Dist.- Raipur was acquired by the respondent No. 03 for the purpose of widening of National Highway from Raipur to Bilaspur and the award was passed on 30.06.2012, wherein the compensation has been wrongly calculated by the respondent No. 03 in Hectare instead of Square Meter of the market value. That being aggrieved by the award dated 30.06.2012, the arbitration application was filed by the petitioner before the Additional Collector and Arbitrator (NHAI Raipur), that on 27.12.2018 the arbitrator allowed the application and 3 / 4 directed the respondent No. 03 for fresh calculation of the compensation of the acquired land and payment of the same. That against it the respondent No. 03 had filed an Arbitration Appeal U/s 34 of Arbitration and Reconciliation Act on 26.03.2019 and the same was dismissed for want of prosecution on 14.01.2020. That thereafter the petitioner had made several applications before the competent Authority for payment of compensation but till date the same has not been decided by the respondent No. 01 & 03 and compensation has also not been paid to the petitioner ignoring that the order of arbitrator has attained the finality and the petitioner is entitled to get the compensation after proper calculation of his acquired land as per present market value of the land and he is also entitled to get the interest over the compensation amount for which he is entitled to get from the date of acquisition of the land. Hence, the instant petition. 4. Learned counsel for the NHAI/respondent No.1 contended that the alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, therefore, the petitioner should file the appropriate application before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and submission made by learned counsel for the parties, it is well settled principle that 4 / 4 when the award has been passed then only alternate remedy available to the petitioner under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to file execution application against the respondent authority because the writ Court is not a executing Court, therefore, this petition stands disposed of directing to the petitioner to file application under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the competent Court, if so desire. In case, if the petitioner shall file the application under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the same shall be decided by the competent Court as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with rules, regulations and law, if there is no legal impediment. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant