Kerala High Court
Mohammed Haneef.P.M vs District Collector on 19 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 30TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 19456 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
MOHAMMED HANEEF.P.M
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O MAHAMOOD, R/AT HANAN THOUFEEQU, NEAR
NELLIKUNNU SPORTING CLUB, NELLIKKUNNU, KASARAGOD,
PIN - 671121
BY ADV KODOTH SREEDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR
VIDYANAGER, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671121
2 THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR
LAND ACQUISITION (NH), ANANGOOR, KASARAGOD,
KASARAGOD, PIN - 671121
3 PROJECT DIRECTOR
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PROJECT
IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, KANNUR, PIN - 670002
4 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
5 DAWOOD C.K
S/O ABDUL KHADAR,C.K HOUSE, CHEMBARIKA KASARAGOD
DISTRICT ( IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26.10.2023
IN IA 1/2023 IN WPC )
BY ADVS.
MATHEWS K.PHILIP KALAPPURACKAL PHILIPOSE
KODOTH SREEDHARAN
BY GP- AJITH VISWANATHAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C). No.19456 of 2023 :2:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
W.P.(C) No.19456 of 2023
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Dated this the 19th day of April, 2024
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the
respondents to disburse an amount of Rs.9,57,138/- by respondents
2 and 3 and Rs.2,00,000/- by respondents 1 and 4 in the light of
section 3G(1) and (2) of the National Highways Act and Ext.P7 GO
(MS) No.448/2017.
2. The petitioner claims to be running a printing firm named
'Fine Print' in a rented building. The petitioner has obtained
licence for the same and he has been paying tax in respect of the
same, as evident from Exts.P1 and P1(a). The landlord has also
issued Ext.P2 consent letter to the local authority for renewing the
business activities. While so, a notification for acquiring the land
containing the building aforesaid for the purpose of widening
National Highway 66 has been issued to the petitioner. Ext.P3
notice for vacating the land and approval of compensation was
issued to the landowners whereby the owner was entitled to
receive an amount of Rs.95,71,382.68 and it is the contention of
the petitioner that as per Section 3G(2) of the National Highway
Act, he is entitled to 10% of the same. Ext.P4 notice was issued to
the petitioner directing him to vacate the premises. Thereupon the
petitioner approached the 1st respondent by submitting Ext.P5
letter for getting compensation to which Ext.P5(a) communication
was issued to include the case of the petitioner in the
Rehabilitation and Resettlement package and to take appropriate
decision on the same. By Ext.P6 communication the 2 nd respondent
informed the petitioner that the Special Tahsildar, LA(NH), Unit-I,
Kasaragod has recommended the application submitted by the
petitioner for financial assistance under the Rehabilitation and
Resettlement package and necessary funds for the same were
requested from the Project Director National Highway Authority of
India, Kannur and that action will be taken to disburse the financial
assistance after the receipt of fund from National Highway
Authority of India. The petitioner submits that no action has been
taken till date and by going by Ext.P7 Government Order, the
petitioner is entitled for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as one time
assistance. Thereupon Exts.P8 and P8(a) requests were submitted
by the petitioner before the 1 st respondent to disburse the amount
due to him under Ext.P7. The grievance raised by the petitioner is
that no further action has been taken to grant the amounts due to
the petitioner as per the Rehabilitation and Resettlement package.
3. When the matter came up for consideration on 21.11.2023,
this Court has issued a direction to the 2 nd respondent to dispose of
the application submitted by the petitioner referred to in Ext.P6
within an outer limit of one month and with a further direction to
the said respondent not to disburse any amounts due to the
additional 5th respondent pursuant to the arbitration application
filed by him, without obtaining further orders from this Court.
4. A statement has been filed by the National Highway
Authority wherein it is stated that the petitioner was not a party in
the land acquisition proceedings and no claim has been raised by
the petitioner during pendency of the land acquisition case for any
benefits and that he has not filed any application or objection under
Section 3C or any claim of right under Section 3G in response to
the publication of notice under Section 3G(3) and that he is not
eligible for the benefits under Section 3G(2) as he is a building
tenant who occupied the building as agreed by the land owner on
execution of an agreement. It is further averred that the petitioner
is not entitled for any compensation under Section 3G(2) of the
National Highway Act as there is no documentary proof or
declaration from the competent authority to the effect that he has a
right in the nature of an easement on any land acquired under the
Act. It is further stated that the application submitted by the
petitioner for the benefits of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement
package is pending consideration for want of necessary funds
allotted in this regard.
5. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions
submitted that the building owner, who is the additional 5 th
respondent, has filed an arbitration application under Section
3G(5) of the National Highway Act, 1956, before the Arbitrator &
District Collector, Kasaragod requesting to refund the salvage
value deducted from the compensation and awarded compensation
for shifting of business and the same is pending consideration
before the Arbitrator for disposal. It is also submitted that an
amount of Rs. 75,000/- has been paid to the petitioner under the
Rehabilitation and Resettlement package as provided under
schedule II of the RFCT LARR Act, 2013 and the manual of
guidelines on land acquisition of National Highway under National
Highway Act, 1956 published by the Government of India.
6. The request of the petitioner for financial assistance under
the Rehabilitation and Resettlement package has already been
granted and further that the respondents have held that the
petitioner is not entitled for any compensation under Section 3G(2)
of the National Highway Act, since he has not made any request in
this regard or he has not produced any documentary proof or
declaration from the competent authority to the effect that he has a
right in the nature of an easement on any land acquired.
In view of the fact that the petitioner has already been
granted compensation under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement
package, I am of the view that the petitioner to approach the
authorities as provided under the National Highway Act, if the
petitioner is aggrieved by the amount of compensation paid to him.
Leaving open such right, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sm/
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19456/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 3/02/2022
ISSUED BY THE KASARAGOD MUNICIPALITY
Exhibit P1a TRUE COPY OF LICENSE DATED 8-3-2022 ISSUED
BY THE KASARAGOD MUNICIPALITY
ExhibitP2 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY
THE LANDLORD DATED 12-2-2018
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF 3E NOTICE ALONG WITH THE
AWARD IN LAC NO.305/KASARAGOD UNDER
NATIONAL HIGHWAY ACT DT.30/12/2022 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 24/1/2023 BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER REQUESTING
COMPENSATION BY THE PETITIONER DATED
24/02/2023
Exhibit P5 a TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 15/03/2023 BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22/03/2023
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.448/2017 DATED
29/12/2017 DECLARING THE POLICY OF THE
GOVERNMENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST BYTHE PETITIONER
TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30-7-2019
Exhibit P8 a TRUE COPY OF THE APPENDIX 1 GO(MS)
448/2017 ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION DATED
30-7-2019
