Varkey Thomas vs The Government Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 1728 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022/27TH MAGHA, 1943
                     RP NO. 36 OF 2022
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2862/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
                          KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER:

         VARKEY THOMAS
         AGED 52 YEARS
         SON OF HOMAS, KONGOLAYIL HOUSE,
         MANIPPARA, ANATOPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

         BY ADVS.
         T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
         S.M.PRASANTH
         G.RENJITH
         R.S.ASWINI SANKAR
         T.H.ARAVIND


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO
         GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

    2    THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
         COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI, PAINAVU P.O.,
         PIN - 685 603.


         BY SMT.PARVATHY KOTTOL, GOVT. PLEADER

     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 16.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 RP.36/2022
                                       :2:




                           N. NAGARESH, J.

          `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                        R.P. No.36 of 2022
                                 in
                      W.P.(C) No.2862 of 2020

          `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
             Dated this the 16th day of February, 2022

                                 ORDER

~~~~~~

The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.2862/2020 is before

this Court in review.

2. The petitioner contends that in the writ petition, the

petitioner had sought for compensation for the damage

occurred to his agricultural land also. But, this Court

considered only the issue of compensation to the agricultural

crops. This Court has overlooked the specific claim of the

petitioner for compensation for damage to agricultural land

during the floods in 2018 and 2019.

3. The petitioner in the writ petition had claimed for

compensation for damage to agricultural crops as well as for RP.36/2022

agricultural land. The statement filed by the 2nd respondent

in the writ petition disclosed that there is no Government

Order for paying damages for destruction of agricultural

lands during 2018 and 2019 floods. The fact being so, the

petitioner cannot as of right claim compensation for damage

to agricultural land.

4. In the circumstances, the judgment under review

warrants no interference. The petitioner will be, however,

free to pursue his claim for damages for destruction of

agricultural land pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4 representations

in the writ petition.

With the said observations, the review petition is

dismissed.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/16.02.2022