Allowed

Valiya Eri Padasekara Samithi v. the Union of India and Others

Kerala HC13 Jan 2009WP(C)/1329/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, a farmers' society, challenged the acquisition of their water source and paddy lands for a Railway Coach factory, arguing barren lands were available. The Court directed the Railway Ministry to consider the petitioner's representation and afford an opportunity to be heard before finalizing the site.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext. P4 representation and pass orders after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard before finalizing the acquisition site.

Valiya Eri Padasekara Samithi Vs the Union of India and Others — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930

¶5

WP(C).No. 1329 of 2009(G)

PETITIONER(S):

VALIYA ERI PADASEKHARA SAMITHI, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD DIST. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY V. CHAKRAPANI, S/O. VENKITACHALAM, AGED 55 YEARS, V.C.K. NIVAS, THANIZH THARA, KANJIKODE-678 626, PALAKKAD DIST.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

¶13

THE UNION OF INDIA, REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI.

¶14

THE INDIAN RAILWAY BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI.

¶15

THE NODAL OFFICER OF THE PROPOSED INDIAN RAILWAY COACH FACTORY, KANJIKODE, OFFICE OF DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD.

¶16

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD.

¶17

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT., DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶18

ADV. SRI.C.N.RADHAKRISHNAN FOR R1,2

¶19

GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA.

¶20

SRI. N.B. SUNIL NATH, S.C.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶22

ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

S. Siri Jagan, J.

¶24

Dated this, the 13^th January, 2009.

¶25

Petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, consisting of farmers of Valia Eri Padasekara Samithi. Their grievance is that their only water source and their paddy lands are being acquired for the purpose of establishment of a Coach factory, although large extent of barren lands are available to be acquired for the very same purpose. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted Ext. P4 representation before the 1^st respondent through the Minister for Railways. The petitioner seeks a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on the same expeditiously.

¶26

I have heard the standing counsel for the Railways also.

¶27

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P4, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the representative of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, before the site for acquisition is finalised.

¶28

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

¶29

Tds/

¶30

[True copy]

Valiya Eri Padasekara Samithi v. the Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valiya Eri Padasekara Samithi v. the Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baby N.V. Vs S.K.Ratheeshkumar

Dr.R.Prakasam Vs Institute of Management

M.N.Somasekharan Nair Vs the Industrial Tribunal, Kozhikode

S.Shamsudheen Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram.

Jaimon James Vs Corporation of Cochin

Maratt Rubber Ltd. Vs State of Kerala