- (1.) Though the first relief claimed in the petition is for implementing the award dated 31 May 2017 passed by the Arbitrator in Arbitration Case No.910 of 2014, but Ms. Shreya Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has confined the relief to prayer No.2 which is for quashing the award dated 31 May 2017 passed by the Arbitrator under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (The Act.) to the extent that instead of determining the amount of compensation payable to the petitioner, the Arbitrator has remanded the matter to the Competent Authority for a fresh determination in the light of the observations made in the award.
(2.) It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, based on the provisions of sub-sections (5) and (7) of Section 3-G of the Act, that it was obligatory on the part of the Arbitrator to have determined the compensation payable to the petitioner instead of remanding the matter to the Competent Authority.
(3.) Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel appearing for the National Highways Authority of India has also submitted that the Arbitrator should not have remitted the matter to the Competent Authority and in fact has stated that for this reason the National Highways Authority has also filed objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.;