Girwar Agrawal v. Sub Divisional Officer ( Revenue ) / And Competent Authority,
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(227) No. 801 of 2019 • Ritesh Kumar Agrawal S/o Natwar Lal Agrawal, Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No.5, Baradwar, Tahsil Sakti, District Jangjr Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Competent Authority, National Highway No. 200 (New 49) Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh
2. The Upper Commissioner-Cum-Arbitrator, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
3. National Highway Authority Of India Limited Through Executive Engineer (N.H.) Bilaspur, Division Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents And W.P.(227) No. 802 of 2019 • Girwar Agrawal S/o Late Harchand Agrawal Aged About 56 Years R/o Ward No. 5, Baradwar, Tahsil Sakti, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Competent Authority, National Highway No. 200 (New 49) Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh
2. The Upper Commissioner-Cum-Arbitrator, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
3. National Highway Authority Of India Limited Through Executive Engineer (N.H.) Bilaspur, Division Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents And W.P.(227) No. 804 of 2019 • Sarla Devi W/o Shri Natwar Lal Agrawal, Aged About 50 Years R/o Ward No. 5, Baradwar, Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Competent Authority, National
-2Highway No. 200 (New 49) Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh
2. The Upper Commissioner-Cum-Arbitrator, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
3. National Highway Authority Of India Limited Through Executive Engineer (N.H.) Bilaspur, Division Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---Respondents For Petitioners :
Mr. Tarendra Kumar Jha, Advocate.
For State/respondent No.1 & 2 :
Mr. Devendra Pratap Singh, Dy.A.G., Mr. Ghanshyam Patel & Mr. Adil Minhaj, Govt. Advocates Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 05-11-2019 Heard.
1. These petitions have been brought under Article 227 of the Constitution of India on various grounds including the main ground that petition under Article 34 of Arbitration and conciliation Act has been entertained by the Court below beyond the period of limitation as provided in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. As it appears that the petitioner has still opportunity to file application objecting on the maintainability of the petition on the grounds which are mentioned in this petition, therefore, the petitions are disposed off with direction:- (a) The petitioner is at liberty to file application before the Court below challenging the maintainability of the proceeding initiated by respondent No.3 and the Court below is also directed to consider on the merits of the application after giving opportunity to both the parties and decide the application in accordance with law.
3. Accordingly, the petitions stand disposed off. Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Monika Judge