SBCWP No.1681/09. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1681/2009. Pawan Kumar Pansari Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order:- December 6, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Anil Sharma for the petitioner. Shri Anurag Agrawal for the respondents. ******* BY THE COURT:- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the action of the respondents in acquiring certain land for the purpose of constructing National Highway. Contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that respondents are going to acquire part of Haveli situated in Village Bagrana, Kanota, Jaipur and for that purpose Haveli may be demolished in an illegal manner. This Haveli is a historical Haveli having archaeological value and that there are number of foreign tourists visiting the Haveli. It is also contended that compensation of the land bearing Khasra No.654 has not been granted and that compensation of land measuring 35 feet wide road which has been constructed from the centre of the Haveli has not been paid and respondents are further acquiring another part SBCWP No.1681/09. 2 of the Haveli without paying any government compensation. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the writ petition and has argued that compensation has already been paid. However, if there is any complaint regarding inadequacy of the compensation, petitioner may approach to the appropriate authority in arbitration proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the entire Haveli has not been acquired but only part thereof in front of the Haveli including boundary walls and kotharis have been acquired and in front thereof, a wide road has been constructed and there is no question of acquiring Haveli to be acquired in Khasra No.684. In view of the above, substantial part of grievance of the petitioner has been redressed however, if he is still not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, he may approach the appropriate authority for settling his dispute in arbitration proceedings in terms of Section 3G(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Such authority is directed to entertain the arbitration application and decide the same within a period of six months from the date of its making. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ) J. anil