Special statute prevails over Section 11 arbitration appointment, leaving arbitrator nomination exclusively with the Central Government.

A special statute creating a self-contained compensation regime for national highway acquisition prevails over the general appointment mechanism under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Because Section 3G(5) vests appointment of the arbitrator in the Central Government, an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not maintainable unless the special Act permits it. The absence of a statutory time limit for appointment does not cause forfeiture of that power; any complaint of delay must be pursued through other remedies, not by bypassing the special procedure. The High Court's appointment order was therefore set aside and the matter remitted to be dealt with under the special statute.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was maintainable for appointment of an arbitrator when Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 vested that power in the Central Government; (ii) whether the Central Government's alleged delay in appointing an arbitrator caused forfeiture of its statutory power so as to justify recourse to Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Issue (i): Whether an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was maintainable for appointment of an arbitrator when Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 vested that power in the Central Government.

Analysis: The National Highways Act, 1956 was treated as a special enactment and a self-contained code governing acquisition, compensation, and adjudication of disputes relating to compensation. Section 3G(5) specifically provides that, where compensation determined by the competent authority is not acceptable, the matter shall be determined by an arbitrator appointed by the Central Government. Section 3G(6) makes the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applicable only subject to the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956. On that scheme, the general power under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot displace the special mechanism for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 3G(5).

Conclusion: The application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was not maintainable; the power of appointment remained exclusively with the Central Government under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956.

Issue (ii): Whether the Central Government's alleged delay in appointing an arbitrator caused forfeiture of its statutory power so as to justify recourse to Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Analysis: The absence of a statutory time limit in Section 3G(5) did not authorise substitution of the special statutory mechanism by Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court held that, if the Central Government failed to act within a reasonable time, the remedy would lie elsewhere, including writ jurisdiction or a civil suit, but not by invoking Section 11 to bypass the special statute. The argument based on forfeiture of the appointing power was therefore rejected.

Conclusion: The Central Government did not forfeit its statutory authority to appoint an arbitrator, and recourse to Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was impermissible.

Final Conclusion: The special statutory mechanism under the National Highways Act, 1956 governed appointment of the arbitrator, and the High Court's appointment order could not stand; the dispute was remitted to be dealt with through appointment by the Central Government under the special statute.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute creates a self-contained mechanism and vests arbitrator appointment in a designated authority, the general appointment power under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is excluded unless the special statute expressly permits its invocation.

---