Kerala High Court
Kamalasanan .R vs The District Collector on 28 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 15592 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 KAMALASANAN .R,AGED 67 YEARS
S/O RAGHAVAN NAYANAM,NEAR Y.M.C.A, THIRUVALLA -689101
NOW RESIDING AT 'KAVITHA',PLOT NO. F.13/61
K.S.H.B.SCHEME,CHANGANASSERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN -
686101
2 C.K.PONNAMMA, AGED 65 YEARS
W/O KAMALASANAN NAYANAM,NEAR Y.M.C.A, THIRUVALLA
-689101 NOW RESIDING AT 'KAVITHA',PLOT NO. F.13/61
K.S.H.B.SCHEME,CHANGANASSERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN -
686101
BY ADVS.
T.P.PRADEEP
P.K.SATHEES KUMAR
R.K.PRASANTH
MINIKUMARY M.V.
JIJO JOSEPH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA., PIN - 689645
2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
KERALA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT
PROJECT (KSTP) DIVISION OFFICE, REST HOUSE COMPOUND,
MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN - 686661
3 THE SPECIAL TAHAZILDAR(LA)
KSTP, CHINGAVANAM,KOTTAYAM-, PIN - 686531
4 THE SPECIAL TAHAZILDAR(LA)
CIVIL STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. PIN, PIN - 689645
OTHER PRESENT:
GP DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P(C) No.15592 of 2024 2
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
------------------------------
W.P(C) No.15592 of 2024
--------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of June, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioners has approached this Court challenging
Ext.P11 and for a direction to the 1 st respondent to refer the
petitioners' claim for determination to the Court concerned.
The petitioners are husband and wife. They were having 7
cents of land and a residential building comprising in resurvey
No. 527/14 and 527/24 of Kuttappuzha village. They were
paying land tax in respect of the said property as evidenced by
Ext.P1 and property tax in respect of the building was also
remitted as evidenced by Ext.P2. Land acquisition proceedings
were initiated by the respondents for constructing Thiruvallla
Bypass and 1.5 cents of petitioner's land was demarcated
during the year 2007 itself. Later on the construction of the
Bypass was carried out by KSTP. The respondents has not
issued any notice to the petitioners in relation to the land
acquisition proceedings. The petitioner and his wife thereupon
submitted Ext.P3 request before the 3rd respondent to deposit
the compensation amount to the District Co-operative Bank,
Thiruvalla Branch as the original title deed was submitted
before the bank for obtaining loan. No award was passed or
compensation was paid to the petitioners. While so, the
respondents attempted to number the trees situated in
petitioners' property and also attempted to cut and remove
them. Thereupon, the petitioners preferred Ext.P4 request
before the 1st respondent. There after, the petitioners
approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 2777 of 2014,
wherein initially Ext.P5 interim order was passed after entering
a finding that there was a mistake on the part of the
respondents in finding the identity of the owner and the
petitioners was directed to make a fresh application to the 4 th
respondent. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, the
petitioners submitted Ext.P6 before the 4th respondent.
Thereafter, the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court
as per Ext. P7. Wherein, a direction was issued to consider
and pass orders on Ext.P6 representation and also allowed the
petitioners to seek reference to the competent Land Acquisition
Reference Court claiming enhancement of the compensation.
Pursuant to the same Ext.P8 proceeding was issued wherein it
was found that the compensation amount has already been
fixed and deposited before the Court concerned and petitioners
can approach the Sub Court, Thiruvalla to receive the
compensation amount. Thereafter, the petitioners received the
said amount which was deposited in the Sub Court Thiruvalla.
Since the amount was only meagre, the petitioners submitted
Ext.P9 application before the 1st respondent for reference under
Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as permitted in
Ext. P7 judgment in W.P.(C) No. 2777 of 2014. As the 1 st
respondent did not take any action on Ext. P9, the petitioners
were constrained to approach this Court again by filing W.P.(C)
No. 3182 of 2024, which was disposed as per Ext.P10
judgment with a direction to the 1 st respondent to consider and
pass orders as per Ext.P9 application seeking reference to the
Court claiming enhanced compensation. In compliance with
the direction issued by this Court the 1st respondent issued
Ext.P11 order whereby the request made by the petitioners
has been rejected, stating that the application has not been
filed within a period of 6 weeks from the date of issuance of
the award.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st
respondent supporting the decision in Ext.P11.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Government Pleader. Admittedly the award
amount has been deposited before the court concerned in the
name of another person and the petitioners were not put to
notice regarding the passing of the award or about the deposit
of the amount before the court. This Court as per Ext.P7
judgment in W.P.(C) No.2777 of 2014 permitted the petitioners
to seek for reference to the competent Land Acquisition
Reference Court claiming enhancement of the compensation.
The question to be considered is as to whether the rejection of
the request of the petitioners as per Ext.P11 is in accordance
with law. It is not in dispute that it is only later that the
petitioners came to know that an award has been passed and
the amount has been deposited before the court, but in the
name of a 3rd party. Pursuant to Ext.P8 order whereby the
petitioners were intimated that they could submit necessary
application before the Sub Court, Thiruvalla for release of the
compensation amount deposited before the court that the
petitioners approached the Court, and the amount was
disbursed to the petitioners on 04.07.2023. It is seen that
Ext.P9 application has been filed on 23.08.2023 within a period
of two months from the date of disbursal of the award amount
on 04.07.2023. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,
mandate that any person interested, who has not accepted the
award may by a written application to the Collector, require
that the matter be referred by the Collector for determination
of the court, whether his objection be to the measurement of
the land, the amount of compensation, the persons to whom it
is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among
the persons interested and as per clause (2) of Section 18 if a
person making the application was present or represented
before the Collector at the time when he made his award,
application shall be submitted within six weeks from the date
of the Collector's award and in other cases within six weeks
from the receipt of the notice from the Collector under Section
12, sub Section (2) or within six months from the date of
Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire. In the
present case the award was not communicated to the
petitioners. It is only after a series of litigation, it was found
that the amount has been deposited before the court that too
only after the issuance of Ext.P8 order and the amount was
disbursed only on 04.07.2023. Therefore, the reasons stated in
Ext.P11 that an application under Section 18 will not lie since
the same was not filed within six weeks of the passing of the
award cannot be made applicable to the petitioners in the
above said facts and circumstances. This Court in Kandiyil
Abdul Nazer v. State of Kerala [2024 (2) KLT 363] has
held that only after an order of apportionment is passed, the
claimant can legitimately seeks a reference under Section 18 of
the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement. Since the
petitioners came to know about the passing of the award and
the deposit of the award amount only subsequent since the
petitioners had not intimation about the passing of the award
and the consequent deposit before the court, the time limit
fixed in Section 18 could be considered as 04.07.2023, on
which date the award amount was disbursed to the petitioners.
Since Ext. P9 application was filed on 23.08.2023. I am of the
opinion that, the same has been filed within the time stipulated
in Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
4. In view of the above, Ext.P11 is quashed with
consequent direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider Ext.P9
application submitted by the petitioners and refer the
petitioners claim for determination to the court concerned. The
same shall be done within an outer limit of one month from the
date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
The above writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
Anu
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15592/2024
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED
FROM THE KUTTAPPUZHA VILLAGE DATED
17.03.2007
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED FROM THE THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY
DATED 03.11.09
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
20.06.2007
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
21.12.2014
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
08/07/2022 IN W.P. ( C ) NO. 2777/2014
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
15/07/2022
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED
22/07/2022 IN W.P. ( C ) NO. 2777/2014
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/10/2022
OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
23/8/2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
31.01.2024 IN W.P. ( C ) NO. 3182/2024
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2024
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
