Disposed

Mohammed Haji.K.H v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Kerala HC21 Nov 2018WP(C)/5738/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the District Court, Kavaratti, to adjudicate the request for enhanced compensation within 8-10 months. It reserved the statutory right of other petitioners to claim benefits under Section 28A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 upon the Land Acquisition Reference award.

What did the court decide?

Directions were issued to the District Court, Kavaratti, to adjudicate the claim for enhanced compensation within eight to ten months.

Mohammed Haji.K.H Vs Union Territory of Lakshadweep — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018/30TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 MOHAMMED HAJI.K.H AGED 74 YEARS, S/O. SAYED HAJI, KANDILAM HUDAVIYA MANZIL, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶8

2 ABDUL KHADER BEEBIYAKUDI

¶9

AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. LATE KATHIB HAJI, BEEBIYAKUDI HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶10

3 SULAIMAN. B, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. LATE KATHIB HAJI, BEEBIYAKUDI HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶11

4 AYSHOMMA M.I. AGED 58 YEARS, D/O. LATE YOUSEF KUNHI, MELAILLAM, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶12

5 KADEEJOMMA C.P., AGED 61 YEARS, D/O. LATE ALI, CHAMAYAMPURA HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶13

6 CHERIYA KOYA M.P., AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMMED, MULLIPURA HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶14

7 IMAMUDHEEN B.M., AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. LATE HAYATH, BIRIYOMMADA HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶15

8 MOHAMMED IQUBAL T.P., AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. KOYAKIDAVE, THEKKILAPURA HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶16

9 AYSHA M.I., AGED 45 YEARS, D/O. SAYED ALI, MELAILLAM HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶17

10 FATHAHULLA, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. LATE SHAIK HAJI, BIRIYATHIMMADA HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556.

¶18

WP(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶19

-2-

¶20

11 T. ABDUL JABBAR, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. LATE B. MOHAMMED, THAIKANDI HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556. 12 AHAMED KUNHI. M.I., AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. YOUSEF M.K., MALAILAM HOUSE, KADMAT ISLAND, LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556. BY ADVS. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.AJIT G.ANJARLEKAR SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN SRI.RAM MOHAN.G.

¶21

RESPONDENT/S:

¶22

1 UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP REPRESENTED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR, KAVARATHI, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP - 682 555. 2 THE ADMINISTRATOR OF UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATHI ISLAND, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP - 682 555. 3 THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR KAVARATHI ISLAND, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP - 682 555. 4 THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADMAT ISLAND, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP - 682 556. BY ADVS. SRI.MANU.S, SR.CGC, ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP

¶23

OTHER PRESENT:

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

WP(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶26

-3-

¶27

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J .

¶28

W.P.(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶29

Dated this the 21^st day of November, 2018.

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The prayers in this Writ Petition (Civil) are

¶32

as follows:

¶33

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to the Land Acquisition Collector, that Exhibit P5 written application be referred in terms of Section 18 of the 'Act' by the Collector for the determination of the appropriate Court, regarding the amount of the compensation; within a time frame as deemed fit by this Honourable Court.

¶34

(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction of the nature of certiorari calling for the records leading to Exhibit P7 and quash the same.”

¶35

2. Heard Sri.Ajit G.Anjarlekar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.S.Manu, learned Senior Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶36

3. A statement dated 13.11.2018 has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it is stated that the 1^st petitioner has submitted applications seeking reference under Sec.18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, within time and

¶37

that the applications for such references made by

¶38

WP(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶39

-4-

¶40

petitioners 2 to 12 are time barred and cannot be acted upon as there is no provision contained in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for condoning such delay.

¶41

4. Sri.Ajit G.Anjarlekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner

¶42

would be satisfied if this Court directs that Sec.18(1) applications submitted by the 1^st petitioner be directed to be referred to the competent authority under Land Acquisition Act for consideration of claims for enhanced compensation and that statutory right of the other petitioners (petitioners 2 to 12) seeking the benefit under Sec.28A(1) pursuant to any award passed may be kept in tact and reserved.

¶43

5. Sri.S.Manu, learned Senior Central

¶44

Government Counsel appearing for the respondents, would submit on the basis of instructions that the applications for reference submitted by the 1^st petitioner has already been referred to the District Court and the matter is yet to be numbered by that court and further action is to be rendered

¶45

by the District Court, Kavaratti, etc.

¶46

WP(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶47

-5-

¶48

6. Accordingly, it is ordered that the

¶49

District Court, Kavaratti, will take steps to ensure that the request for enhanced compensation is duly adjudicated and award is passed after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, without much delay, preferably within a period of 8-10 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Needless to say, statutory right of petitioners 2 to 12 to seek the benefit under Sec.28A(1) on the basis of LAR award that may be passed on the very same notification is reserved and such right may be prosecuted in the manner known to law.

¶50

With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

ALEXANDER THOMAS,

¶53

JUDGE.

¶54

Bkn/-

¶55

WP(C).No.5738 of 2018

¶56

-6-

¶57

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5738/2018

¶58

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶59

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY THE SECTION 4 (1) NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR VIDE F.NO.34/62/2012-LR/862 DATED 07.09.2012. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 9 (3) R/W SECTION 10 OF THE 'ACT' ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT/SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADMAT VIDE F.NO. 6/13/2012-SDO (KDT) DATED 14.04.2013. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT OF COMPENSATION AND THE PROTEST NOTE SUBMITTED ON THE RECEIPT.

¶60

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 02.04.2014 FOR REFERENCE ON TERMS OF SECTION 18 PREFERRED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT/LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR.

¶61

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT/SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER TO THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR VIDE F.NO. 6/13/2012 SDO DATED 04.04.2014.

¶62

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM F.NO. 34/62/2012-LR/2 DATED 01.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR.

Mohammed Haji.K.H v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Haji.K.H v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep

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

Abdu Vs Union of India

Sharafudheen Vs Union of India

Khadeeja Vs Union of Inida

Sobha Sasidharan Vs Tahsildar, Alathur

Mohammed Ashraf v. Vs Union Territory of Laskhadweep

N S Sathyarajan Vs Union of India