Disposed

Radha Devi v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jun 2012WP(C)/2803/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to pass an Award for 2.85 Ares of land omitted from initial acquisition proceedings but taken over in advance. Court directed respondents to complete formalities within eight weeks and pass the Award within three months.

What did the court decide?

Second respondent to complete formalities within eight weeks; third respondent to pass Award within three months thereafter.

Radha Devi Vs State of Kerala — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/25TH JYAISHTA 1934S

¶5

WP(C).No. 2803 of 2012 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

RADHA DEVI, AGED 75 YEARS D/O.JANARDHANAN,KANNANKARA VEEDU, KOCHUPLAMOODU KOLLAM TOWN.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH

¶9

SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN SRI.A.S.SHAMMY RAJ SRI.P.SHANES

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA

¶12

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMNENT (REVENUE)

¶13

SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶14

2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

¶15

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,

¶16

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶17

3. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT), SOUTHERN CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.MOHAMMED SHAFI

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Kss

¶21

WPC.NO.2803/2012 A

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶24

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE 4 (1) NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN KERALA GAZETTE.

¶25

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED DATED 13.5.1958.

¶26

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 10.08.2006 FOR RS.12/-.

¶27

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF TALUK SURVEYOR DATED 10.4.2006. EXHIBIT P4(a).TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN.

¶28

EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD NOTE NO.LA2-1692/05(i)ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶29

EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BEFORE THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, 3RD RESPONDENT, BY PETITIONER

¶30

AND OTHERS DATED 5.8.2006.

¶31

EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN LAR NO.21/2007 DATED 7.1.2010 BEFORE THE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL.

¶32

EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT FOR RS.1,128/DATED 16.12.2004.

¶33

EXHIBIT P8(a).TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT FOR RS.231/DATED 12.07.2006.

¶34

EXHIBIT P9. TRUE COPY OF THE R.R DEMAND NOTICE DATED 23.12.2005 ISSUED BY SECRETARY, KADAKKAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE.

¶35

EXHIBIT P10.TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN LAR NO.21/2007 DATED 30.1.2010 OF THE SUB JUDGE, ATTINGAL.

¶36

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

ANTONY DOMINIC, J

¶41

W.P.(C).2803/2012

¶42

Dated this the 15^th day of June, 2012

¶43

JUDGMENT

¶44

Petitioner owned 9.30 Ares in Sy.No.2704/2 and 2.85 Ares in Sy.3341/14 of Kadakkavoor Village and the structures therein. According to the petitioner, both the aforesaid properties were acquired by the respondents invoking the urgency clause under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act and possession was also taken over. However, the Award was passed only in respect of 9.30 Ares and the compensation was also not paid in respect of the same. In such circumstances, petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to pass Award in respect of 2.85 Ares in Sy.No3341/14 of Kadakkavoor Village.

¶45

A statement and an additional statement have been filed on behalf of the third respondent. In the additional statement dated 3.4.2012 it has been stated by the third respondent thus:-

¶46

“While the survey work was completed an extent of 2.85 Ares in Sy.No.3341/14 was not included as forming part of the alignment and which is for this reason that an extent of 7

¶47

W.P.(C).2803/12

¶48

¶49

cents of land is claimed by the petitioner was omitted to be included as forming part of the alignment proposed for acquisition. It is submitted that an extent of 9.30 Ares of land in Sy.No.2740/2 belonging to the petitioner which is lying adjacent to the above said 7 cents of land was acquired under the above proceedings and hence the same steps may be adopted for considering the compensation for the above said 7 cents of land which is the subject matter of the writ petition.

¶50

A report dated 3.4.12 showing the above mentioned facts is forwarded to the Executive Engineer, PWD for information and for taking further steps necessary in this regard.”

¶51

On the filing of this statement, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to make available the report dated 3.4.2012 mentioned in the additional statement. Accordingly, the report dated 3.4.2012 of the Special Tahasildar in charge (LA), to the Executive Engineer, PWD,TVM has been made available. The relevant portion of this report reads thus:-

¶52

“This is to inform that it has come to my notice and I have verified the records and also on physical verification by the Taluk Surveyor, it is found that an extent of 2.58 Ares 97 cents) in Soy.3341/14 is omitted be included in the survey sketch for the land acquisition prepared by the Surveyor. it is also informed by thel and owner that the said portion of land is also taken over by the requisitioning authority in advance. Hence you are requested to take necessary steps to include the above 7 cents of land in the acquisition and further take necessary steps to pay the compensation, if any, due to the land owner.”

¶53

W.P.(C).2803/12

¶54

¶55

Evidently therefore, the Tahasildar has requested the Executive Engineer to take appropriate action to include 2.85 Ares of property as well in the acquisition proceedings.

¶56

In the light of the report referred to above, the second respondent shall do the needful and on that basis it is for the third respondent to take steps for passing the Award. The second respondent shall complete the procedural formalities in that behalf as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment and on its receipt, the third respondent shall pass necessary Award within three months thereafter.

¶57

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before respondents 2 and 3 for compliance.

¶58

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶59

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶60

mrcs

¶61

/true copy/ PA To Judge

Radha Devi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radha Devi v. State of Kerala

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

Narayanan Vs Kaladharan

Sita Roy Vs Thomas John Mambra

M/S. Venus Fertilizers Vs Unnikrishnan

M.C Joseph Vs Indian Oil Corporation

Sri. Siraj Vs Secretary, Pathanamthitta Municipality

K.K.Sasidharan Vs the Excise Commissioner