Saturday, 09, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M.T. Thomas vs V.P.Joy
2022 Latest Caselaw 2292 Ker

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 2292 Ker
Judgement Date : 2 March, 2022

Kerala High Court
M.T. Thomas vs V.P.Joy on 2 March, 2022
CON.CASE(C)No.2011 OF 2021       1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
  WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                  CON.CASE(C) NO. 2011 OF 2021
JUDGMENT DATED 29.01.2021 IN WP(C) 18002/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
                             KERALA
PETITIONER/4TH PETITIONER IN W.P.(C):

          M.T. THOMAS,
          AGED 70 YEARS
          S/O.M.G.THOMAS, MURAMTHOKKIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM SOUTH,
          PERUVA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          K.MOHANAKANNAN
          H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)



RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 IN W.P.(C):

    1     V.P.JOY
          AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
          CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT
          SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

    2     SRI.AJITHKUMAR,
          MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA RAIL DEVELOPMENT
          CORPORATION LIMITED,
          TRANS TOWER, 5TH FLOOR, VAZHUTHACAUD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.


          SRI.A.DINESH RAO, SC, RAILWAYS

          SMT SURYA BINOY, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 CON.CASE(C)No.2011 OF 2021                     2




                                      JUDGMENT

This Contempt Case is filed alleging violation of the undertaking given by the

respondents before this Court that they shall proceed with the project only after

getting concurrence from the State Government as well as the Railway Board and

other statutory authorities.

2. The petitioner contends that in violation to the undertaking Annexure-

A2 to A4 has been issued by the respondents.

3. Sri. Dinesh Rao, the learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent

submitted that the entire issue has been considered by a Division Bench of this Court

in W.A.No.169 of 2022 while interfering with the order passed by a learned Single

Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.351/2022 and had occasion to hold thus in

paragraph No.90 of the judgment.

90. Taking into account the various pros and cons, and the facts and figures, we are of the unequivocal and considered opinion that the State Government is vested with adequate powers to conduct the survey, and mark the properties appropriately, for conducting the Social Impact Assessment study, and therefore, the impugned interim order passed by the learned single Judge, interdicting the survey and marking of the properties in question, after issuing appropriate notifications by the State Government under the provisions of Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961, and the rules framed thereunder, has to be interfered with. Accordingly, we set aside the common interim order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) Nos.30567/2021, 351/2022, 975/2022 & 1574/2022 dated

20.01.2022 in regard to the same.

4. Later in W.A.No.244 of 2022 and connected matters, the Division

Bench had occasion to observe as follows in paragraph No.12 of the judgment.

In fact, a detailed judgment was passed in W.A. No.169 of W.A.Nos.244, 245, 247 & 250 of 2022 16 2022 and the connected cases, taking into account the relevant provisions of the Kerala Surveys and Boundaries Act, 1961, Kerala Surveys and Boundaries Rules, 1964, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the State Rules, 2015 thereto, and the provisions of Railways Act, 1989, and ultimately found that the action of the State Government in conducting survey for social impact assessment study as per the provisions of the LARR Act, 2013 and the State Rules 2015, is different from the notification for acquisition under Section 11 of the LARR Act, 2013. We have also held that there is no conflict of interest between the provisions of LARR Act 2013 and the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act 1961 in the matter of conduct of survey in connection with a proposed land acquisition.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel that in view of the above, there

is no point in contending that Annexure - A2 to A4 has been issued against the

statutory provisions or for that matter in violation of the undertakings given before

this Court.

6. Sri.K.Mohanakannan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that the matter has been taken up before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

7. In view of the findings of the Division Bench in W.A.No.169 of 2022

and W.A.No.244 of 2022, I am of the view that the contentions now raised by the

petitioner cannot be sustained. I am of the considered opinion that no case for

contempt is made out.

Leaving open the rights of the petitioner to approach this Court again, if any

case of contempt is made out, this Case is closed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE IAP

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2011/2021

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29-1-

2021 IN W.P(C)NO.18002/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE INVITED TENDER DATED NIL BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Annexure A3 TRUE COPY GO(MS)NO.163/2021/RD DATED 18-8-

Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT

Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF GO(RT)NO.4052/2021/RD DATED 22-11-2021

Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE OF SRI.SREEDHARAN, REGARDING THE SILVER LINE PROJECT DATED 23-11-2021.

Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER THE RTI ACT DATED 17.11.2021 WITH REPLY DATED 26.11.2021

Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM REPORTED IN MANGALAM DAILY KOTTAYAM EDITION DATED 17.12.2021

Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEMS REPORTED IN INDIAN EXPRESS KOTTAYAM EDITION DATED 11.12.2021.

Annexure A10 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE OF THE MARKING

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE R2(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2019

ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS.

ANNEXURE R2(B)      A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM
                    NO.24(35)/PF-11/2012, DT.05.08.16

ANNEXURE R2(C)      A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER

NO.2018/JVCELL/GENL/SPV/POLICY/2 DATED 23/04/2019 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS.

ANNEXURE R2(D) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.06.2021 ISSUED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT

ANNEXURE R2(E) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ADDRESSED TO DR.E.SREEDHARAN AND DATED 02.12.2021

ANNEXURE R2(F) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE EXTRA ORDINARY GAZETTE NO.B-2/2021 DATED 12.10.2021 BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(LAND ACQUISITION)/KOTTAYAM.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter