Kerala High Court
M.K. Sreekumari Devi vs State Of Kerala on 19 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 22949 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
M.K. SREEKUMARI DEVI
AGED 79 YEARS
D/O ANANDAVALLI AMMA, REVATHY, VAZHUTHOOR,
NEYYATTINKARA P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 121.
BY ADVS.
K.B.PRADEEP
HARISANKAR R
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION BUILDING,
CIVIL STATION ROAD, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 043.
3 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,
ADDITIONAL (LA) UNIT, CIVIL STATION BUILDING, CIVIL
STATION ROAD, KUDAPPANAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-
695 043.
4 THE UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW,
JUSTICE & CORPORATE AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, PIN-110 001.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.SUDHA DEVI.SPL.G.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 22949 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court being
aggrieved by Ext.P10 order of the 3rd respondent - Special
Tahsildar, rejecting his request for granting the benefit of
enhanced compensation with respect to his property, as
ordered by the competent District Court - Reference
Court, in LAR No.236/2010, on the ground that his
property is not covered by the same notification, as were
the properties considered in the said Reference.
2. Sri. K.B.Pradeep - learned counsel for the
petitioner, argued that under the provisions of Section 28A
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to
as "the LA Act" for short), it is extremely discriminatory
that the extent covered by the same notification alone will
be given the benefit of enhanced compensation,
consequent to a Land Acquisition Reference.
WP(C) NO. 22949 OF 2021
3. As an alternative submission, Sri. K.B.Pradeep
submitted that if this Court is not inclined to accept his
afore contention, then he may be permitted to move the
Competent Thahsildar seeking the reference of his Award
to the competent Court, so that it can then take into
account the order in LAR No. 236/2010 and issue
appropriate orders.
4. Smt. Sudha Devi - learned Special Government
Pleader, submitted that if the petitioner is serious about
the challenge to Section 28A of the "LA Act", she may be
given time to file necessary counter pleadings; but that
she has no objections if this Court directs the competent
Authority to refer the Award with respect to the
petitioner's property to the competent Reference Court.
5. On hearing Smt. Sudha Devi as afore,
Sri.K.B.Pradeep submitted that his client will take the
liberty of moving the Authority for reference of his Award
WP(C) NO. 22949 OF 2021
to the competent Reference Court at this stage; and
prayed that this Court leave open all his contentions with
respect to the constitutionality of Section 28A of the "LA
Act".
In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition,
leaving liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3 rd
respondent - Special Tahsildar, making a statutory
application for reference of the Award with respect to his
property to the competent Reference Court; and if this is
done within a period of one week from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment, the said Authority will do so,
without any delay but not later than one week thereafter.
On the reference being so made, the 2 nd respondent
will be at liberty to move the competent Reference Court,
which will, thereupon, consider the same, adverting to the
order in LAR No. 236/2010.
Needless to say, all the contentions of the petitioner
WP(C) NO. 22949 OF 2021
qua the constitutionality of Section 28A of the LA Act is
left open to be pursued by him appropriately, if it becomes
so warranted in future.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
ANB
WP(C) NO. 22949 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22949/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
4.3.2014
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.10.2014
TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.10.2014
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.8.2018
IN LAR NO 132/10
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
5.11.2018 TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12.12.2018
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
28.1.2019
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13.12.2019
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 65769 OF
2020 DATED 4.3.2020
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.11.2020
PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
28.1.2008 UNDER SEC 4(1) PERTAINING TO
THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
NOTE TO AWARD
