Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19204-DB HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No.64) Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1821 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chakor Sheetalay Pvt. Ltd. Through The Director Virendra Kumar And 8 Others Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheetal Verma,Suresh Chandra Verma Counsel for Respondent :- Vaibhav Tripathi,C.S.C.,Pranjal Mehrotra,Shiv Kumar Singh Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved by order dated 22.05.2024 passed by the Arbitrator in proceedings under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 rejecting the amendment application of the petitioners for making correction of a typographical error in the petition filed against the award on the ground that there is no provision which entitles the petitioners to amend the petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on Section 23(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in submitting that the Arbitrator has been conferred with specific power to permit amendment in the statement of claim and statement of defence. 4. Sri S.K. Singh appearing for NHAI and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State respondents are not in a position to dispute the same. 5. Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act makes the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applicable to every arbitration under the Act. 6. Section 23(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is as follows: "3) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, either party may amend or supplement his claim or defence during the course of the arbitral proceedings, unless the arbitral tribunal considers it inappropriate to allow the amendment or supplement having regard to the delay in making it." 7. Undoubtedly, the Arbitrator has power to permit the parties to amend their statement of claim during the course of arbitration proceedings. There is no argument to the contrary. Consequently, the view taken by the Arbitrator in rejecting the amendment application is manifestly illegal. The impugned order is accordingly quashed. The matter is remitted back. The Arbitrator will decide the amendment application on merits. 8. The petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 10.2.2025 Shubham Arya (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad