Kerala High Court
Baby vs The District Collector, ... on 23 May, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 32437 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
BABY
PUTHUVAL VEEDU, VAYYAMOOL, PETTAH VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
SMT.N.P.SILPA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
CIVIL STATION,
KUDAPPANAKUNNU.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 002
2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
(LAND ACQUISITION) AIRPORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.
BY ADVS.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.32437/2017
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.32437 of 2017
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
i. That all records leading to Exhibit P5 be called to
this hon'ble court and a Writ of Certiorari or other
order be passed quashing the same.
ii. That a Writ of Mandamus, or other writ, direction
or order be passed commanding the respondents
to refer Ext.P1 application filed by the petitioner
u/s 18 of the L.A Act to the Sub Court
Thiruvananthapuram within a time to be fixed by
this hon'ble court.
iii. Such other relief's that are appropriate and
incidental to this Writ Petition.
(SIC)
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that an
application filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act
is not considered by the authority concerned.
3. A detailed counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the
2nd respondent. It will be better to extract paragraphs 6 and 7
of the counter affidavit:
"6. It is submitted that the judgments were
received in the office of the 2nd respondent on
06.03.2017. A notice was sent to the petitioner on
31.07.2017 directing her to appear in person on
05.08.2017 with necessary records. The petitioner
did not turn up or submit any records. Hence the
hearing was adjourning to 09.08.2017 and on that
date she was heard in person. She was also
represented by an Advocate. She claims that area
was noted as Six Cents since she had disputed over
area of acquisition. After examining all the office
files and records it was find that she had not
submitted any application for reference under
Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the
2nd respondent. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent
issued the proceedings dated 09.08.2017 to the
petitioner which is produced as Ext.P5 by the
petitioner, it may kindly be noticed by this
Honourable Court that the petitioner could prove
title only for an extent of 0.70 Ares of land and rest
of the land was in unauthorized occupation by the
petitioner. Therefore, the direction of this
Honourable Court in Ext.P3 is complied with. It is
verified that an extent of land is 0.94 Ares or not.
Since the ownership is in dispute the compensation
amount of the disputed land is deposited in Sub
Court, Thiruvananthapuram under Section 31(2) of
Land Acquisition Act. Petitioner has wrongly stated
in the Writ Petition that she is owner of 0.94 Ares of
land actually the ownership of 0.70 is only
undisputed. Moreover, the extent of land acquired
shown in Ext.P1 is 6 cents.
7. It is most respectfully submitted that all the facts
and circumstances and the judgments of this
Honourable Court and the details submitted by the
petitioner at the time of hearing shows that
petitioner had not filed any application under
Section 18 within the time limit prescribed by the
Land Acquisition Act. The contentions and prayers
in the writ petition is devoid of any merits and is
only liable to be dismissed."
4. In the above counter, it is clearly stated that no
application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is
received by the authority within the statutory period. If that
be the case, no orders can be passed. There is nothing to
interfere with the impugned order.
This writ petition is dismissed.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32437/2017
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REFERENCE APPLICATION
DTD 01/08/2003 FILED U/S 18 OF THE
L.A.ACT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD
28/10/2008 IN W.P.(C).NO. 30357 OF
2008.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 27/02/2015
IN R.P 683/2013 IN W.P.(C) NO.
30357/2008.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER DTD 09/08/2017
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. A2.207/2015
DTD 09/08/2017 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
