Dismissed

Andru v. the District Collector

Kerala HC8 Jan 2019WP(C)/447/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged respondents' attempts to encroach on his land for a new road without valid compulsory acquisition notification. The High Court restrained forcible takeover and directed the Collector to convene a meeting to ascertain intentions, ensuring future acquisition complies with statutory notification requirements. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with order restraining respondents from forcible takeover unless valid compulsory acquisition notification is issued; Collector directed to call a meeting to ascertain acquisition i

Andru Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 18TH POUSHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 447 of 2019

PETITIONER/S:

ANDRU

S/O. AMMAD HAJI,

PUTHALATH PARAMBATH, POOLAKKOOL KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 507

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP M.VARUGHESE

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 020

¶13

2 THE TAHSILDHAR, VATAKARA TALUK, MINI CIVIL STATION, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 020

¶14

3 DISTRICT PANCHAYAT KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT KOZHIKODE 673 020

¶15

4 DISTRICT PANCHAYAT ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT KOZHIKODE 673 020

¶16

5 VILLAGE OFFICER,

¶17

VELOM, POOLAKKOL KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 507

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

W.P.(C)No.447/2019

¶22

¶23

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶24

¶25

W.P.(C)No.447 OF 2019

¶26

¶27

Dated this the 8^th day of January, 2019

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows :

¶30

“A) Call for the records relating to Exhibits P4 and issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, restrain the respondents from dispossessing the petitioner from the property covered by Ext.P1 on the basis of Exhibit P4.

¶31

B) Issue such other and further relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

¶32

Heard Sri.Philip M.Varughese, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶33

The complaint of the petitioner is that without issuing any valid notification under any valid law regulating the subject of compulsory acquisition of land, the 3^rd respondent District Panchayat Kozhikode District and the 4^th respondent District Panchayat Engineer are taking steps to encroach into the properties of the petitioner and annexe the same for

¶34

W.P.(C)No.447/2019

¶35

¶36

construction of a new road as per Ext.P4 complaint. It is stated by the petitioner that he has no intention whatsoever to voluntarily surrender his land and that the respondents have no authority to compulsorily acquire the lands in the private title and ownership of the petitioner without the due process initiated under any valid law regulating the subject of compulsory acquisition of land even if the said land is required for public purpose like the one for construction of a new road as envisaged in Ext.P4. The petitioner would state that he is having ownership and possession of the landed property covered by Ext.P1 land tax receipt and Ext.P2 possession certificate issued by the 5^th respondent village officer, Velom.

¶37

Having regard to the facts and circumstances disclosed in this petition, it is ordered that none of the respondents including respondents 3 and 4 can forcibly take over or acquire the private properties of the petitioner including that covered by Exts.P1 and P2 for any purpose including that for construction of a new road as envisaged in Ext.P4 plan unless proceedings are initiated by issuance of a valid notification under a valid law regulating the subject of compulsory acquisition of land. The first respondent District Collector will ensure that the above said directions and orders issued by this court are strictly complied with by all the respondents including respondents

¶38

3 and 4. To avoid any further uncertainty, it is ordered that the first

¶39

W.P.(C)No.447/2019

¶40

¶41

respondent will immediately call for a meeting of the 3^rd and 4^th respondents and the petitioner and will ascertain from the 3^rd and 4^th respondents as to whether they have any intention to take over the land of the petitioner for any purpose including that for construction of a new road in terms of Ext.P4 plan and the first respondent will specifically direct the 3^rd and 4^th respondents that if they have any intention to take over or acquire the private properties of the petitioner for any such purpose, then the same could be set in motion only after issuance of a valid notification under any valid law regulating the subject of compulsory acquisition of land. Strict direction in this regard should be given by the 5^th respondent to respondents 3 and 4. This direction is issued by this court in this case as there has been some cases where this court has issued direction as mentioned herein above, but at the same time some of the respondents in those cases have taken action for demolition or taking over of the private lands of such parties. It shall be the responsibility

¶42

of the first respondent District Collector to ensure that such unlawful action do not occur in the instant case.

¶43

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

¶44

sv.

¶45

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

W.P.(C)No.447/2019

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶50

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 24.11.2017 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER VELAM DATED 21.3.2018 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE SERVICED BY THE GAIL INDIA DATED NIL EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED VALANJI-KUNNMMUL KOLANI ROAD CONSTRUCTIONS WORK IN WARD XVII AT VELOM GRAMA PANCHAYT

Andru v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Andru v. the District Collector

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

Pappa Vs the State of Kerala

Bava.v Vs Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms)

Hussainkutty Haji Vs State of Kerala

Prasanna Kumaran Nair, Vs State of Kerala

Susheela Amma, Vs the Village Officer

Rupen Philip, Vs State of Kerala