Kerala High Court
Divakaran Nair vs State Of Kerala on 16 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.5966 OF 2020(U)
PETITIONER:
DIVAKARAN NAIR,
AGED 79 YEARS,
S/O SUBHADRAMMA, EDAYATH, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM, KUNNATHUNAD, ERNAKULAM-683 561.
BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-682 022.
* 4 KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED (KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT
AUTHORITY, 2ND FLOOR KARUN ENCLAVE, S.N. JUNCTION,
OPPOSITE UNION BANK, THRIPUNITHARA, KOCHIN-682 301.
(CORRECTED)
* THE ADDRESS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS,
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL)
ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-683 022.
AS PER ORDER DATED 16.10.2020 IN IA NO.1/20 IN W.P.
(C) 5966/2020.
5 THE TAHASILDAR,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 550.
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 2
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN-683 562.
** 7 ADDL.R7 IMPLEADED
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MALAYIL
MAJESTY BUILDING, ROOM NO.174 G, SECOND FLOOR,
NEAR RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE, REFINARY ROAD,
THRIPUNITHARA, ERNAKULAM-682 301
** ADDL.R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
16.10.2020 IN IA NO.2/2020 IN W.P.(C) 5966/2020.
R4, R7 BY ADVS. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
R4, R7 BY ADV. SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SMT MABLE C KURIAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
16.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).6033/2020(D), WP(C).6061/2020(G),
WP(C).10996/2020(Y), WP(C).22068/2020(G), THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.6033 OF 2020(D)
PETITIONER:
ANNAKKUTTY VARGHESE
AGED 60 YEARS
W/O M. P.VARGHESE, MADAPPILLY HOUSE,
MALAYIDAMTHURUTH.P.O, BAVAPPADY,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM-683561.
BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM COLLECTORATE,
KAKKANAD-682022.
4 KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT
AUTHORITY, 2ND FLOOR KARUN ENCLAVE,
S.N.JUNCTION, OPPOSITE UNION BANK,
THRIPUNITHARA, KOCHIN-682301.
(CORRECTED)
* THE ADDRESS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED
AS,
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL)
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 4
ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-683 022.
AS PER ORDER DATED 16.2.2021 IN IA NO.1/20 IN W.P.
(C) 6033/2020.
5 THE TAHASILDAR,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683550.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683562.
7 *ADDL R7 IMPLEADED
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED (KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MALAYIL
MAJESTY BUILDING, ROOM NO.174 G, SECOND FLOOR, NEAR
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE, REFINERY ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 301.
ADDL R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.2.2021
IN I.A.NO.2 OF 2020 IN WPC NO.6033 OF 2020
R4 BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
R4 BY ADV. SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SMT SHEEJA C.S, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
16.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5966/2020(U), WP(C).6061/2020(G),
WP(C).10996/2020(Y), WP(C).22068/2020(G), THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.6061 OF 2020(G)
PETITIONER:
GEORGE K.P.
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. PATHROSE K.V., KADAPARAMBIL, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM, KUNNATHUNAD, ERNAKLAM-683561.
BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-682022.
4 KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL)
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT
AUTHORITY, 2ND FLOOR KARUN ENCLAVE, S.N. JUNCTION,
OPPOSITE UNION BANK, THRIPUNITHARA, KOCHIN-682301.
(CORRECTED)
* THE ADDRESS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED
AS,
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL)
ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-683 022.
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 6
AS PER ORDER DATED 16.2.2021 IN IA NO.1/20 IN W.P.
(C) 6061/2020.
5 THE TAHSILDAR,
PERUMBAVOOR,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683550.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN-683562.
7 ADDL R7 IMPLEADED
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED (KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MALAYIL
MAJESTY BUILDING, ROOM NO.174 G, SECOND FLOOR, NEAR
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE, REFINERY ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 301.
ADDL R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.2.2021
IN I.A.NO.2 OF 2020 IN WPC NO.6033 OF 2020
R4 BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
R4 BY ADV. SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SMT SHEEJA C.S, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
16.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5966/2020(U), WP(C).6033/2020(D),
WP(C).10996/2020(Y), WP(C).22068/2020(G), THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.10996 OF 2020(Y)
PETITIONER:
MRS. SHAKEENA
AGED 47 YEARS
W/O. A B ABDUL AZEEZ, ANGILMOOTTIL HOUSE,
N A D P.O., NOCHIMA, ALUVA, EDATHALA NORTH,
ERNAKULAM-683 561.
BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-682 022.
4 KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED (KSPPL)
REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT
AUTHORITY, 2ND FLOOR KARUN ENCLAVE, S.N. JUNCTION,
OPPOSITE UNION BANK, THRIPUNITHURA, KOCHIN-682 301.
*(CORRECTED),
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, KOCHI
SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED (KSPPL), ERNAKULAM
COLLECTORATE, KAKKANADU - 682 022.
ADDRESS OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS CORRECTED AS PER
ORDER DATED 16.10.2020 IN I.A.1/2020 IN
WP(C).10996/2020
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 8
5 THE TAHASILDAR
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 550.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN-683 562.
7 *ADDL.R7 IMPLEADED
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED (KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BYTHE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
MALAYIL MAJESTY BUILDING, ROOM NO.174 G, SECOND
FLOOR, NEAR RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE, REFINERY ROAD,
THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM - 682 301.
*ADDITIONAL R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
16.10.2020 IN I.A.2/2020 IN WP(C).10996/2020.
R4, R7 BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
R4, R7 BY ADV. SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SMT MABLE C KURIEN, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
16.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5966/2020(U), WP(C).6033/2020(D),
WP(C).6061/2020(G), WP(C).22068/2020(G), THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.22068 OF 2020(G)
PETITIONERS:
1 KHADEEJA MEETHIYAN
AGED 70 YEARS
W/O(LATE) MR.MEETHIYAN.M.A, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE,
AMBUNADU,EDATHALA.P.O,ERNAKULAM-683561.
2 NASEEMA.M.M,
AGED 48 YEARS
D/O(LATE) MR.MEETHIYAN.M.A, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE,
AMBUNADU, EDATHALA.P.O,
ERNAKULAM-683561.
3 SALIM.M.M,
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O (LATE )MR.MEETHIYAN.M.A, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE,
AMBUNADU, EDATHALA.P.O,
ERNAKULAM-683561.
4 SHAMEENA.M.M,
AGED 40 YEARS
D/O(LATE)MR.MEETHIYAN.M.A, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE,
AMBUNADU, EDATHALA.P.O,
ERNAKULAM-683561.
5 SHAMEER.M.M,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O (LATE)MR.MEETHIYAN.M.A,MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE,
AMBUNADU, EDATHALA.P.O,
ERNAKULAM-683561.
BY ADV. SRI.E.A.BIJUMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 10
SECRETARY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM COLLECTORATE,
KAKKANAD-682022.
4 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED
(KSPPL),ERNAKULAM COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD-682022.
5 THE TAHASILDAR,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683550.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683562.
7 KOCHI SELAM PIPE LINE PRIVATE LIMITED(KSPPL),
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,MALAYIL
MAJESTY BUILDING,ROOM NO.174 G,SECOND FLOOR,NEAR
RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE,REFINERY ROAD,
THRIPUNITHARA,ERNAKULAM-682301.
R4, R7 BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
R7 BY ADV. SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
SMT.MABLE C KURIEN, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
16.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5966/2020(U), WP(C).6033/2020(D),
WP(C).6061/2020(G), WP(C).10996/2020(Y), THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).5966/20 & CON.CASES 11
JUDGMENT
[ WP(C).5966/2020, WP(C).6033/2020,
WP(C).6061/2020, WP(C).10996/2020,
WP(C).22068/2020]
The Kochi-Salem Pipeline Pvt. Ltd. is a Company formed for the
purpose of laying a pipeline for transportation of LPG from Bharat
Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL), Kochi Refinery and Indian Oil
Corporation Ltd.(IOCL) Puthuvypeen to BPCL/IOCL LPG plants situated
at Udayamperoor, Palakkad, Coimbatore, Erode and Salem under
authorisation granted by the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory
Board. For the purpose of laying the pipeline, 'right of user' in the
immovable property had to be acquired. In view of the fact that the
drawing of the pipeline was in the public interest and for the
transportation of petroleum from one locality to the other, the provisions
of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in
Land) Act, 1962 was invoked by the Central Government. After
obtaining Environmental Clearance as well as clearance from the
Pollution Control Board and the statutory authorities, the competent
authority forwarded the draft notification for acquisition of properties
scheduled thereunder under Section 3 of the Act. After following the
procedure under Section 5 of the Act, the Central Government in
exercise of powers under Section 6(1) of the Act issued a notification
declaring that the right of user in the land was required for laying the
pipeline and that the property instead of vesting in the Central
Government shall vest with the KSPPL. The petitioners being the owners
of the land through which the pipeline is intended to be drawn have
approached this Court being aggrieved by the proposal for drawal of
lines without considering the objections raised by the landowners.
2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions contend that when
they received information about the prospects of acquiring the land, they
approached the 3rd respondent and raised their objections. The
petitioners were summoned for a hearing and they had appeared before
the competent authority. Though their contentions were all heard by the
4th respondent, no orders have been issued till date. Instead, on
11.1.2020, the officers of the respondents had come to the petitioner's
property for the purpose of commencing the work. It is in the afore
circumstances that these writ petitions have been filed seeking the
following reliefs.
"i) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
or order directing the respondents to consider the objections
of the landowners and re structure the plan as it not cause
harm to the petitioner as well as the other land owners.
ii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
or order directing the 4th respondent to communicate the
result of the hearing conducted on 27.03.2019 with all details
of reasons.
iii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
or order directing the respondents to consider the objections
of the lands owner and re structure the plan as it not cause
harm to the petitioner.
iv) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
or order directing the respondents to stop all further
proceeding till considering the objections of the lands owners
on merit and taking a decision after proper enquiry so as to
protect the interest of justice from the part of the land
owners."
3. The additional 7th respondent has filed a counter-affidavit. It is
contended that the respondents have acted strictly in accordance with
the provisions of Act of 1962. It is further contended that the selection
of the route was done scientifically after elaborate scrutiny at all levels
and after obtaining permits and licences from the statutory authorities.
Clearances have been granted by the Oil Industry Safety Directorate,
Ministry of Environment and Forest, Petroleum and Explosive Safety
Organizations, the Pollution Control Board and all other statutory
authorities. The Environmental Impact Assessment was conducted by
M/s. Mecon, which is one of the approved agencies of the Ministry of
Environmental and Forest. According to the respondents, 90% of the
route is through agricultural/barren lands avoiding residential areas and
even in those areas where the pipeline passes through a residential area,
maximum effort was taken to ensure that the pipeline passes at a
distance from permanent structures. It is further stated that the Central
Government after following the procedure contemplated under the Act
has issued Ext.R7(a) declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act whereby
the right of user of the above land is vested with the 7th respondent free
of all encumbrances. It is further stated that after laying the pipeline,
the land which are essentially paddy fields, will be restored back to the
petitioners and they can continue to cultivate the same without any
restrictions. Though as per the provisions of the Act, the property
owners are entitled to 10% of land value as compensation for the land
as provided under Section 10 of the Act for acquisition of the right of
user, the Government of Kerala, taking note of the facts and
circumstances, have issued Ext.R7(c) order by which, the market value
for the purpose of computing land compensation under the Act, shall be
10 times the notified fair value of the land. Other benefits are also
extended to the land owners. According to the respondents, the route
was fixed after extensive scientific study by experts and after meeting all
statutory formalities. The safety aspect was also considered from all
angles. It is further contended that the 4th respondent has submitted
the report before the Central Government after considering all objections
and it was thereafter that the declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act
was issued. On issuing such declaration, the right of user of the land
would vest with the concerned respondent.
4. I have heard Sri. E.A.Bijumon, the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners in all these cases, Sri. Saji Mathew, the learned
Standing Counsel appearing for the additional 7th respondent and Smt.
Mable C. Kurian, the learned Government Pleader.
5. Sri. Bijumon, the learned counsel contended that the
petitioners herein submitted that if the pipeline is drawn through the
property of the petitioners, the land would become useless and they will
not be in a position to put the land to more beneficial use in the future.
The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioners had filed
their objections before the competent authority objecting to the laying of
the pipelines under the land and they were also heard. However, no
orders either allowing or disallowing their objections were passed by the
competent authority.
6. Sri. Saji Mathew, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for
the 7th respondent submitted that the selection of route was done by a
body of expert keeping in mind the technical, operational and safety
requirements stipulated by statutory bodies and the alignment so fixed
have been approved and declaration under Section 6 of the Act has been
issued. He would point out that the objection raised by the petitioners is
with regard to the alignment of the pipeline which has been fixed taking
note of all scientific aspects including the safety angle.
7. I have considered the submissions advanced.
8. On going through the scheme of acquisition under Act of 1962,
it can be seen that Section 3 of the Act provides for publication of
notification for acquisition. It states that whenever it appears to the
Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the
transport of petroleum or any mineral from one locality to another
locality pipelines may be laid by that Government or by any State
Government or a Corporation and that for the purpose of laying such
pipelines it is necessary to acquire the right of user in any land under
which such pipelines may be laid, it may, by notification in the Official
Gazette, declare its intention to acquire the right of user therein. In the
notification so issued a brief description of the land is to be given and
the notification has to be published in the prescribed manner. On the
issue of a notification under sub-section (1) of Section 3, it shall be
lawful for any person authorised by the Central Government or by the
State Government or the Corporation which proposes to lay pipelines or
any mineral and his servants and workmen to enter upon and survey and
take levels of any land specified in the notification and do incidental
activities as provided under Section 4 of the Act. However, the provision
provides that where exercising any power under this Section, such
person or any servant or workmen of such person shall cause as little
damage or injury as possible to such land. Section 5 of the Act provides
an opportunity to the objectors to raise their objections. It states that
any person interested in the land may, within twenty-one days from the
date of the notification under sub-section (1) of Section 3, object to the
laying of the pipelines under the land. The said objection has to be
preferred in writing before the competent authority. The competent
authority is required to give the objector an opportunity of being heard
either in person or by a legal practitioner and after making such further
inquiry, if necessary, may either allow or disallow the objections. Sub-
clause (3) of Section 5 says that the order so passed shall be final. After
allowing or disallowing the objection, the competent authority is required
to make a report in respect of the land described in the notification
under sub-section (1) of Section 3, or make different reports in respect
of different parcels of such land, to the Central Government containing
his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of the
proceedings held by him, for the decision of that Government under
Section 6(1) of the Act. On receipt of such a report, the Central
Government is required to consider the same and if it is satisfied that
such land is required for laying any pipeline for the transport of
petroleum or any mineral is required to issue a notification in the Official
Gazette declaring that the right of user in the land for laying the
pipelines should be acquired. On the publication of the declaration
under sub-section (1) of Section 6, the right of user in the land specified
therein will vest absolutely in the Central Government free from all
encumbrances. In the case on hand, the Central Government has issued
the declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act.
9. In the instant case, the notification under Section 3(1) of the
Act was published in the Official Gazette No. 39 dated September 30 to
October 6 as contemplated under law. After considering the objections
raised by the objectors, a report was forwarded to the Central
Government. The Central Government on being satisfied with the larger
public issued a declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act by Gazette No.
2 dated January 12 to January 18, 2020. The right of user of the land
was thus declared and the property was ordered to be vested with the
7th respondent free of all encumbrances.
10. The contention of the petitioners is that the present alignment
of the pipeline would disrupt their rights over the property and would
prevent them from putting up any construction at a later stage. The fact
remains that the pipeline is being drawn through paddyland. The
Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008 has been enacted to
conserve paddy land and restrict the conversion and reclamation of land
with intent to promote growth in the agricultural structure. In that view
of the matter, the contention of the petitioners that they would be
prevented from putting up constructions in the land has no basis.
11. Insofar as the alignment of the pipeline is concerned, the
petitioners have not placed any material to show either before the
competent authority or before this Court that the execution of the
project is actuated by mala fides. The records reveal that the alignment
was fixed by experts having vast knowledge and expertise. Quite an
effort has gone into while drawing the pipeline through paddy fields and
avoiding other structures in a thickly populated state like Kerala.
Collateral damage has been reduced to a minimum and the project costs
have also been reduced substantially. The fact that the lines are being
drawn for transporting petroleum and it is in the larger interest of the
Nation cannot be disputed. For the incidental damages that have been
caused, compensation which is much more than what is mandated in the
statute is being granted to the owners of the land. This fact is evident
from Ext.R7(c). If the petitioners have a grievance that the
compensation determined by the competent authority is less, they can
very well approach the District Judge under Section 10 of the Act
seeking redetermination of the compensation.
Having considered all the relevant facts, I am of the considered
opinion that the petitioners have not made out any case for interference.
These writ petitions will stand dismissed. There will be no order
as to costs.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
ps/18/2/2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5966/2020
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPIES OF THE PROPERTY SKETCH
VIDE SY. B4.22068 DT 9.1.1980.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 21.6.2018.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
8.3.2019.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R7(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION UNDER
SECTION 6(1) OF THE ACT, PUBLISHED IN
GAZETTEE NO.2 DATED JANUARY 12 -
JANUARY 18, 2020 BY THE CENTRAL
GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT R7(b) COPY OF THE COLOUR PRINT OUT OF THE
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE LAND OF THE
PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE LAND OF
OTHERS IN WHICH THE RIGHT OF USER IS
ACQUIRED.
EXHIBIT R7(c) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)
NO.90/2019/RD DATED 07.01.2019 ISSUED
BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6033/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPIES OF THE PROPERTY SKETCH
VIDE SY B4.22068 DT 09.01.1980.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 26.11.2018.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
08.03.2019.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6061/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPIES OF THE PROPERTY SKETCH VIDE
SY.B4-22068 DT 09.01.1980.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.01.2019.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
08.03.2019.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE FOR HEARING TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 16.03.2019.
ESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
EXHIBIT R7(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION UNDER SECTION
6(1) OF THE ACT, PUBLISHED IN GAZETTEE NO.2
DATED JANUARY 12 - JANUARY 18, 2020 BY THE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT R7(b) COPY OF THE COLOUR PRINT OUT OF THE
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER
ALONG WITH THE LAND OF OTHERS IN WHICH THE
RIGHT OF USER IS ACQUIRED.
EXHIBIT R7(c) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.90/2019/RD
DATED 07.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT
OF KERALA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10996/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPIES OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED
25.3.2015.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17.2.2020.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED COVER DATED
27.5.2020.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY SKETCH.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R7(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION UNDER SECTION
6(1) OF THE ACT, PUBLISHED IN GAZETTEE NO.2
DATED JANUARY 12 - JANUARY 18, 2020 BY THE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT R7(b) COPY OF THE COLOUR PRINT OUT OF THE
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER
ALONG WITH THE LAND OF OTHERS IN WHICH THE
RIGHT OF USER IS ACQUIRED.
EXHIBIT R7(c) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.90/2019/RD
DATED 07.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT
OF KERALA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22068/2020
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED
17.02.2020.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPIES OF THE PROPERTY SKETCH VIDE SY
B4.22068 DT 09.01.1980.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED
08.03.2019.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R7(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION UNDER SECTION
6(1) OF THE ACT, PUBLISHED IN GAZETTEE NO.2
DATED JANUARY 12 - JANUARY 18, 2020 BY THE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT R7(b) COPY OF THE COLOUR PRINT OUT OF THE
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER
ALONG WITH THE LAND OF OTHERS IN WHICH THE
RIGHT OF USER IS ACQUIRED.
EXHIBIT R7(c) TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.90/2019/RD
DATED 07.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT
OF KERALA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
