Punjab & Haryana HC: Land acquisition compensation challenge relegated to statutory arbitrator under NHAI Act, 1956

Case Name: Sukhdev Singh & Ors. v. National Highways Authority of India & Anr.
Date of Judgment: January 10, 2020
Citation: CWP No. 565 of 2020
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia

Held: The High Court declined to entertain a writ petition challenging classification of acquired land as “Gair Mumkin” instead of “Commercial” for compensation purposes under the National Highways Act, 1956. It held that under Section 3G(5) of the Act, disputes regarding the amount determined by the competent authority are to be resolved by arbitration. Since market value determinations involve factual disputes requiring evidence, the writ court would not exercise extraordinary jurisdiction.

Summary: The petitioners’ land at Bareta Mandi was acquired for highway widening. They argued that their plots contained commercial shops and should have been valued as “Commercial” at ₹22,100 per sq. yard instead of “Gair Mumkin” at ₹2,000 per sq. yard. They produced electricity bills, tax receipts, and GST registrations to support their claim. The Court noted that Section 3G(5) of the NH Act provides a statutory remedy before an arbitrator appointed by the Central Government if compensation is disputed. Further, Section 3G(7) requires the arbitrator to consider market value on notification date, severance, injurious affection to property or business, and costs of shifting—similar to Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Relying on United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon (2010) and its own precedents in Phool Singh v. NHAI (2018) and Harwinder Singh v. UOI (2019), the Court held that disputed questions of fact such as classification and valuation cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction.

Decision: Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the statutory arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.