Kerala High Court
The Project Director vs Salini V.S on 7 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1943
RP NO. 426 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.04.2021 IN WP(C) 8802/2021 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
REVIEW PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT:
THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
NH 66 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT,
ERNAKULAM (KAPPIRIKKAD - EDAPPALLY SECTION)
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
MAVELIPURAM, KAKKANAD - 682030
BY ADVS.
K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
K.SUDHINKUMAR
S.K.ADHITHYAN
SABU PULLAN
GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 & 3:
1 SALINI V.S.
AGED 64 YEARS
W/O LATE T.G.JAYAPRAKASHAN,
RESIDING AT THAMBIPARAMBIL, CHERIYAPPILLY JUNCTION,
KAITHARAM P.O., NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM - 683519
2 JOLLY A.C.,
AGED 58 YEARS,
W/O LATE T.G.VIJAYAN,
RESIDING AT THAMBIPARAMBIL, CHERIYAPPILLY JUNCTION.
KAITHARAM P.O., NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM - 683519
RAGHUVARAN T.G.,
3
AGAED 73 YEARS, S/O GOPALAN T.V.,
RESIDING AT THAMBIPARAMBIL, BMRA 85A,
BALAKRISHNA MENON ROAD, ANCHUMANA,
EDAPPALLY, KOCHI - 682024
4 UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY,
RP NO. 426 OF 2021
2
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, 1, PARLIAMENT STREET,
NEW DELHI - 110 001
5
SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR,
LAND ACQUISITION, N.H.66,
NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM - 683513
BY ADV ARUN.B.VARGHESE
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL(SR.), FOR RESPONDENT,
SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN, GP
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RP NO. 426 OF 2021
3
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
R.P.No.426 of 2021
-------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of July, 2021
ORDER
This review petition is filed to review the judgment
dated 23.04.2021 in W.P.(C).No.8802/2021. The only
direction issued by this Court in the above Judgment is
extracted hereunder:
"Therefore this writ petition is disposed of, directing
the 2nd respondent to consider Exts.P6, P9 and P10
submitted by the petitioners and to pass appropriate orders
in it after affording an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioners. The 2nd respondent will complete the above
exercise within a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment."
2. This review petition is filed by the 2nd respondent in
the writ petition stating that all objections were already
considered and rejected. The review petitioner also stated
that the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have not filed any objection
within 21 days of Section 3A notification. Section 3A
RP NO. 426 OF 2021
notification was issued on 13.02.2020 whereas the 1 st
respondent filed the objection on 15.04.2020, 2 nd and 3rd
respondent filed objection on 06.11.2020. According to the
review petitioner, the objections were filed after the time
limit fixed under Section 3C(2) of National Highways Act.
Therefore, the review petitioner is not in a position to
consider the objection. This is the ground to file this review
petition
3. This Court only directed the 2nd respondent to
consider Exts.P6, P9 & P10 submitted by the writ petitioners
and pass appropriate orders. Suppose the authority is not
competent or not having jurisdiction to consider the
representation, the authority can pass such an order
rejecting the representation. There is no direction by this
Court to consider the objection and conduct a hearing
contemplated in Section 3C of the National Highways Act.
The only direction is to consider their representation. If the
review petitioner is of the opinion that he has no jurisdiction
RP NO. 426 OF 2021
to consider the objection, he can pass such an order and that
will be sufficient compliance of the directions of this Court.
These are not grounds to review a judgment. There is
nothing to review this judgment. Therefore, the review
petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
VPK
