Pannery Dinesan vs Special Tahsildar
2021 Latest Caselaw 22616 Ker

               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. 22827 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          PANNERY DINESAN
          AGED 42 YEARS
          S/O KANNAN, RESIDING AT SURYA APARTMENT,
          FLAT NO 241, NEAR KSRTC, KANNUR

          BY ADV C.K.SREEJITH



RESPONDENTS:

    1     SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
          NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, L.A.(N.H) UNIT-2,
          COLLECTORATE, KANNUR-670001.

    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          KANNUR-670001.


OTHER PRESENT:

          SR GP SMT AMMINIKKUTTY




     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. 22827 OF 2021
                              2




                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court impugning

Ext.P19 saying that the action of the Special Tahsildar -

who is also the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition

(CALA) under the provisions of the National Highways Act

(hereinafter referred to as "the NH Act" for short) - is

egregiously improper, since the determined compensation

amount for the property acquired from him could not have

been deposited before the Principal Civil Court, under

Section 3(H) of the said Act, because there are no

contesting claims with respect to it.

2. The petitioner says that, as is evident from Ext.

P19, the only reason stated by the CALA for making the

deposit before the Principal Civil Court, is that the area in

question is water logged and, therefore, that its physical

boundaries could not be identified. He asserts that this is

not a reason under the "NH Act" for the CALA to not have WP(C) NO. 22827 OF 2021

deposited the amount before the Civil Court. He,

therefore, prays that Ext. P19 be set aside.

3. However, Smt.K.Amminikutty - learned Senior

Government Pleader, opposed the afore plea of

Sri.C.K.Srijith - learned counsel for the petitioner, saying

that, apart from the persons mentioned in Ext.P19, there

are various others who have staked claim over the

property in question; and that it is, therefore, that the

CALA has issued Ext. P19. She added that this is manifest

from Ext.P18, where the names of thirteen other people

have also been shown. She submitted that, therefore, the

remedy of the petitioner is to approach the Principal Civil

Court and to obtain necessary orders, under Section

3H(iv) of the "NH Act".

4. In reply, Sri.C.K.Srijith -learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner, submitted that, even going by

Exts.P18 and P19, there are no rival claim with respect to WP(C) NO. 22827 OF 2021

the property in question, but it is solely mentioned therein

that the persons mentioned therein - including his client,

had not produced necessary documents. He, therefore,

reiteratingly prayed that this writ petition be allowed.

5. Even though I find some force in the submissions

of Sri.C.K. Srijith, I am afraid I cannot grant his client

relief as prayed for in this writ petition because, it is

admitted that the amount determined by the CALA has

already been deposited before the Principal Civil Court in

terms of Ext.P19. Obviously, therefore, it will be up to the

petitioner to approach the said Court and obtain necessary

orders particularly on the contention that there are no rival

claims with respect to the property in question.

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition,

leaving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court

before which the deposit has been made in terms of

Ext.P19; and if he does so within a period of two weeks WP(C) NO. 22827 OF 2021

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the

said Court will initiate action under Section 3H(iv) of the

NH Act, and consider the petitioner's afore contentions;

thus leading to an appropriate order thereon, as

expeditiously as is possible but within a period of two

months from the date on which the petitioner makes a

request in terms of the liberty afore reserved.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE ANB WP(C) NO. 22827 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22827/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUZHATHI DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT NO 15740, SI NO 2020/40179/13 DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT NO 15740, SL NO 2020/40184/13 DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT NO 15740, SL NO 2020/40180/13 DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT NO 15740,SI NO 2020/40183/13 DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT NO 15740,SL.NO 2020/40187/13 DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT NO 15740, SL.NO 2020/40192/13 DATED 26.8.2020

Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION AND NON-

ATTACHMENT CERTIFICATE DATED 27.8.20

Exhibit P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ENCUMBRANCE DATED 3.9.2020

Exhibit P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO 527/09 SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR

Exhibit P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO 559/09 WP(C) NO. 22827 OF 2021

SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR

Exhibit P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO 558/09 SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR

Exhibit P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO 560/09 SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR

Exhibit P15 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO 589/09 SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR

Exhibit P16 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO 3177/10 SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR

Exhibit P17 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 11.8.2020

Exhibit P18 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO LAC 6452 DATED 30.8.2021 ADDRESSED TO PRINCIPLE JUDGE THALASSERY

Exhibit P19 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO LAC 6453 DATED 30.8.2021