---
title: "Land Acquisition Arbitration and Writ Jurisdiction: Constitutional Limitations in the Wake of Suryadev Pathak vs. Union of India"
date: 2025-12-01
author: "Supriya Bhosale"
url: https://www.indialaw.in/blog/arbitration-and-conciliation/writ-jurisdiction-land-acquisition-arbitration/
---

# Land Acquisition Arbitration and Writ Jurisdiction: Constitutional Limitations in the Wake of Suryadev Pathak vs. Union of India

Posted On - 1 December, 2025 •

By - [Supriya Bhosale](https://www.indialaw.in/people/supriya-bhosale/ "Posts by Supriya Bhosale") and [Rahul Sundaram](https://www.indialaw.in/people/rahul-sundaram/ "Posts by Rahul Sundaram")

[![Allahabad HC Limits Writs in Land Arbitration Case](https://www.indialaw.in/wp-content/uploads/3qsdbeudc4u.jpg)](https://www.indialaw.in/wp-content/uploads/3qsdbeudc4u.jpg)

The recent decision in ***Suryadev Pathak v. Union of India***[1](#3f70c1d5-7452-44f2-9bc9-ba66c467e2e5) offers an important clarification on the limits of writ jurisdiction exercised by constitutional courts when effective statutory remedies are available under specialised legislation. The case arose out of a land acquisition dispute linked to the Bharatmala Scheme for national highway development.

The petitioner, Suryadev Pathak, a landowner from Gorakhpur, challenged the compensation awarded for the acquisition of his land parcels under the *National Highways Act, 1956*[2](#2111ae4e-37b6-4cef-b978-4f9eb5acddf9) for the widening of National Highway No. 29E. The acquisition was carried out by National Highways Authority of India as part of a larger infrastructure initiative, with the Union of India and the State of Uttar Pradesh arrayed as respondents.

Dissatisfied with the compensation determined by the authorities, the petitioner invoked the statutory arbitration mechanism under *Section 3G(5) of the Act*, seeking enhancement. However, when the appointed arbitrator failed to render an award for over two years, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus for expeditious disposal. He argued that such delay violated his fundamental rights under *Articles 14 and 21*, particularly the right to speedy justice, and also infringed his property rights under *Article 300-A*due to alleged non-compliance with the *Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013*[3](#016e332d-21e5-4693-9625-3934be49f31d).

The respondents opposed the petition primarily on jurisdictional grounds, contending that the High Court lacked authority to intervene in arbitral proceedings governed by the *Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996*[4](#d011166d-08ec-49b7-95e3-f35f9e84a703). They argued that the Act provides a complete framework to address delays, including provisions for extension of time under Section 29A, which can only be exercised by competent civil courts and not through writ jurisdiction. They also attributed the delay partly to the petitioner’s own conduct, citing repeated adjournments and procedural applications.

The High Court examined two central issues: whether writ jurisdiction could be invoked despite the availability of statutory remedies, and whether the court could direct continuation of arbitral proceedings after the expiry of statutory timelines. It observed that once the time limit prescribed under Section 29A lapses, the arbitrator’s mandate automatically terminates by operation of law. Any further extension or continuation must be sought before a competent civil court, not through a writ petition.

The Court emphasized that Article 226 jurisdiction, though wide, is not absolute and must give way where a comprehensive statutory mechanism exists. Allowing writ intervention in such circumstances would disrupt the legislative framework and potentially encourage forum shopping. The judgment reaffirmed that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act provides adequate remedies to address procedural delays and grievances arising in arbitral proceedings.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and laid down three key principles: first, arbitration proceedings under *Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act* are governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act; second, writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked when an efficacious statutory remedy exists; and third, once the arbitrator’s mandate expires, only a competent civil court has the authority to extend the timeline.

This ruling is significant in delineating the jurisdictional boundaries between constitutional courts and statutory forums, particularly in the context of land acquisition and infrastructure disputes. It reinforces the primacy of specialised legislative frameworks and underscores the need for litigants to exhaust statutory remedies before invoking extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction.

For further details write to [contact@indialaw.in](mailto:contact@indialaw.in)

1. Writ-C No. 28215 of 2025 [↩︎](#3f70c1d5-7452-44f2-9bc9-ba66c467e2e5-link)
2. National Highways Act, 1956 [↩︎](#2111ae4e-37b6-4cef-b978-4f9eb5acddf9-link)
3. Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [↩︎](#016e332d-21e5-4693-9625-3934be49f31d-link)
4. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [↩︎](#d011166d-08ec-49b7-95e3-f35f9e84a703-link)

Disclaimer - This article is intended for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal counsel in relation to their individual circumstances.

[Download PDF](https://www.indialaw.in/blog/arbitration-and-conciliation/writ-jurisdiction-land-acquisition-arbitration//pdf/)

[Arbitration](https://www.indialaw.in/expertise/alternative-dispute-resolution/arbitration/)

---

# IndiaLaw LLP — Offices & Contact Details

---

## General Contact

| | |
|---|---|
| **Website** | https://www.indialaw.in |
| **Primary email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Primary phone** | +91 836-9995919 |
| **Contact form** | https://www.indialaw.in/connect/ |
| **Careers (separate channel)** | https://www.indialaw.in/careers/ |


---

## All Offices (9 locations across 8 cities)

### 1. Mumbai — Registered Office & Head Office (Apeejay Chambers)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Apeejay Chambers, Ground Floor, Wallace Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 |
| **Phone** | [022-6924-7400](tel:02269247400) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate · IP |
| **Notes** | The HQ. 5 partners based here. Handles PAN-India litigation, arbitration, corporate, banking, IP and real estate practice. Largest team across all offices. |

### 2. Mumbai — Non-Litigation Office (Excelsior, Fort)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | 4th Floor, New Excelsior Theatre Pvt. Ltd., Amrit Keshav Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 |
| **Phone** | [022-697-40500](tel:022-697-40500) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Non-litigation only — consultations, negotiations, transactional work |
| **Notes** | Opened 2024. Litigation and arbitration remain at the Apeejay Chambers head office. |

### 3. Delhi

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Flat No. 1107 & 1108, Prakashdeep Building, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/delhi/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | 3 partners based here. Located near the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court and other appellate bodies. |

### 4. Kolkata

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Centre Point Building, Room No. 214, 2nd Floor, Premises No. 21, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Opp. Great Eastern Hotel, P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata – 700 001, West Bengal |
| **Phone** | [+91 33 4813 1001](tel:+913348131001) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/kolkata/ |
| **Practice focus** | Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Commercial & Civil Litigation · Arbitration · Banking Litigation · Real Estate · Labour & Employment · Consumer |
| **Notes** | Advises banks, NBFCs, MSMEs and corporates on transactions and dispute resolution. Works in close coordination with the Mumbai HO. |

### 5. Chennai

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | GF-A, 19 Casa Major Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/chennai/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Full-fledged office with experienced legal team. Supported by Mumbai HO. |

### 6. Bengaluru (Bangalore)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | INDIALAW LLP, No. 7 Chinnaswamy Mudaliar Road, Shivaji Nagar, Bangalore – 560 051 |
| **Phone** | [080-4167-2444](tel:08041672444) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/bengaluru/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate · Family Laws · Labour |
| **Notes** | Located near Bangalore High Court. Handles corporate, commercial, banking and matrimonial disputes. |

### 7. Hyderabad

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | 403, 4th Floor, Sanatana Ecstasy Building, beside Tanishq Show Room, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad – 500 029, Telangana |
| **Phone** | [040-6666-5166](tel:04066665166) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/hyderabad/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Banking · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Particularly well known for complex banking matters and real estate transactions. |

### 8. Cochin (Kochi)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | Second Floor, Pulikkal Building, K.K. Padmanabhan Road, Ernakulam North – 682 018, Kerala |
| **Phone** | [0484-3583961](tel:04843583961) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/cochin/ |
| **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate |
| **Notes** | Commercial disputes, property litigation, financial-claim arbitrations and real estate transactions. |

### 9. Noida (NCR)

| | |
|---|---|
| **Address** | No. 16 & 17, Silver Offices, 17th Floor, Wave One, Sector 18, Noida – 201 301 |
| **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) |
| **Email** | contact@indialaw.in |
| **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/noida/ |
| **Practice focus** | Aviation · Insurance · Mergers & Acquisitions · Corporate |
| **Office head** | **Mr. Dinesh Gupta** (joined August 2025 to lead and expand the corporate practice) |
| **Notes** | Newest office. Sector-focused on highly regulated industries serving NCR-based clients. |

---

## Quick-Dial Phone List

| Office | Phone |
|---|---|
| Mumbai HO (Apeejay) | 022-6924-7400 |
| Mumbai Excelsior | 022-697-40500 |
| Kolkata | +91 33 4813 1001 |
| Bengaluru | 080-4167-2444 |
| Hyderabad | 040-6666-5166 |
| Cochin | 0484-3583961 |
| **General / Marketing line** | **+91 836-9995919** |

Delhi, Chennai and Noida route through the general number.

---

## Social Channels

- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/indialaw
- X / Twitter: https://twitter.com/Indialawmumbai
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/indialawllp/
- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/indialawllp

---