Manipur High Court
Heikham Premila Devi & 8 Ors vs Union Of India & 8 Ors on 28 March, 2025
Author: A.Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A.Guneshwar Sharma
66
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No.751 of 2024
Heikham Premila Devi & 8 Ors ... Petitioners
-Versus-
Union of India & 8 Ors ... Respondents
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.GUNESHWAR SHARMA
28.3.2025
Present Mr.T.Rajendra, learned senior counsel
assisted by Mr.Bikash Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.S.Kaminikumar, learned CGC for respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6.
None appears on behalf of respondent No.7 in spite of service of
summon.
[2] Petitioners’ lands have been acquired for expansion of
National Highway 39 Stretch (Imphal Moreh) 330-350 kms and
award dated 16.6.2022 was passed by the D.C, Thoubal, competent
authority under the National Highway Act, 1956 and compensation
has been awarded to the petitioners and others. If not satisfied with
the quantum of compensation awarded by the competent authority
and under Section 3G(5) of the NH Act, the aggrieved party can
approach the Arbitrator, to be recommended by the Central
Government. Since no Arbitrator was appointed at the relevant time,
petitioner submitted a representation to the Central Government
and other authorities for appointing an Arbitrator under Section 3 G
(5) of the NH Act, 1956.
[3] By the present writ petition, petitioners are praying for
a direction to the respondents to appoint an Arbitrator under Section
3 G (5) of the NH Act. In the Counter Affidavit of the Central
Government, it is stated that vide Notification dated 10.10.2024,
issued by the Director, Ministry of Road Transport and Highway,
Government of India, Secretary, Fisheries, Government of Manipur
has been designated as Arbitrator for the Revenue District of Imphal
East, Thoubal, Ukhrul, Kamjong and Kangpokpi.
Admittedly, the lands of petitioners fall within the
revenue district of Thoubal. After filing of the counter affidavit and
appointment of Arbitrator, petitioners submitted application dated
26.2.2025 to the Arbitrator, i.e. Secretary, Fisheries, Government of
Manipur for initiating arbitration proceedings with regard to the
compensation amount of the petitioners.
[4] Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the
writ petition may be disposed of since Arbitrator has already been
appointed to deal with the case. Mr.T.Rajendra, learned senior
counsel for the petitioners is also agreeable to the submission of
learned counsel for the respondents that the writ petition may be
disposed of as Arbitrator was appointed. However, it has been
submitted that representation dated 26.2.2025 has not been taken
up by the Arbitrator and arbitration case has not been initiated till
now and direction may be issued to the Arbitrator to initiate and
compete proceedings within a stipulated time.
[5] This Court has perused the materials on record and in
view of appointment of Arbitrator vide Notification dated
10.10.2024, the substantial prayer of the petitioners has become
infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing
the Arbitrator, i.e. Secretary, Fisheries, Government of Manipur to
initiate and complete the arbitration proceedings in terms of the
representation dated 26.2.2025 submitted by the petitioners, within
a stipulated time, preferably within a period of six months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
[6] With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
It is made clear that this Court does not express any opinion on the
merit of the case.
Send a copy of this order to the Secretary, Fisheries,
Government of Manipur/Arbitrator, appointed vide Notification
dated 10.10.2024 for information and doing the needful.
JUDGE
Priyojit
RAJKUMA Digitally signed
by RAJKUMAR
R PRIYOJIT PRIYOJIT SINGH
Date: 2025.04.01
SINGH 15:30:47 +05’30’
[ad_1]
Source link