P.Govindan vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 23470 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

         THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

                             WP(C) NO. 25249 OF 2021

PETITIONER:

               P.GOVINDAN
               AGED 57 YEARS
               S/O.GOPALAN NAIR, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POYILKAVU SREE
               DURGA DEVI TEMPLE, EDAKKULAM P.O., KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE
               DISTRICT, PIN-673306.

               BY ADVS.
               V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN
               MOHANAN P.G.



RESPONDENTS:

     1         THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
               COLLECTORATE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673020.

     2         THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION),
               NATIONAL HIGHWAY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673305.

     3         SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION),
               NATIONAL HIGHWAY, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673305.

     4         THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
               NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
               PIN-673529.

               BY ADV K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN



OTHER PRESENT:

               SR.GP - SMT AMMINIKKUTTY




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.11.2021,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 25249 OF 2021

                                     2




                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner is stated to be the Chairman of the Board of

Trustees of a Temple by name, 'Poyilkavu Sree Durga Devi Temple' at

Koyilandi and says that the compensation eligible to an extent of 5.75

cents of land, comprised of in Re.Sy.No.173/5A of Chengottukavu

Village, is exclusively entitled to be received by the Temple; and thus

seeks that the competent Authorities be directed to do so, without

disbursing any part thereof to any other person.

2. I have heard Sri.Ramesan Nambisan, learned counsel for

the petitioner; Sri.Salil Narayanan, learned Standing Counsel for the

National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) and Smt.K.Amminikutty,

learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the official

respondents.

3. Sri.Salil Narayanan, learned Standing Counsel for the

NHAI, argued that this writ petition is not maintainable because the

question of disbursement of compensation with respect to the

acquired property has to be first considered by the Competent

Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) appointed under the National

Highways Act (NH Act) and that petitioner must raise all his

contentions before the said Authority at the relevant time. He WP(C) NO. 25249 OF 2021

submitted that, therefore, it was improper for the petitioner to have

approached this Court at a time when the CALA has not taken any

decision on these matters and therefore, prayed that this writ petition

be dismissed.

4. Smt.K.Amminikutty, learned Senior Government Pleader

also adopted most of the submissions made by Sri.Salil Narayanan,

adding that the CALA will certainly consider the plea of the petitioner

if he makes an appropriate representation for the same; and that a

final decision thereon will be taken only after hearing him, as also any

other person who may make a claim on the property in question.

5. When I consider the afore submissions, I must say that I

find substantial force in the afore contentions impelled by Sri.Salil

Narayanan and Smt.K.Amminikutty, because the manner and

procedure for the CALA to operate under the provisions of the 'NH

Act' cannot be dictated by this Court, at least at this stage. The said

Authority certainly has the liberty and statutory competence to

consider the manner in which the compensation has to be disbursed

and to determine the persons to whom it is eligible; and for such

purpose, the petitioner can always approach the said Authority and

make his claim.

Resultantly, reserving full liberty to the petitioner to approach WP(C) NO. 25249 OF 2021

the CALA at the appropriate time for the purpose impelled in this writ

petition, I close it without any further orders.

Needless to say, if the petitioner is to make a claim before the

CALA for exclusive entitlement of the Temple for the compensation

amount, then disbursement of the same shall remain deferred until

such time as his application is properly decided and the resultant

order communicated to him.

SD/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE rp WP(C) NO. 25249 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25249/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ABOVE 'ARAYAL THARA' AND 'KALASAKANDAM'.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 3.3.2021 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF PROPERTY PREPARED BY THE MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD.

Exhibit P3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY PREPARED BY THE MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES DATED 2.11.2021.