Petitioner in land acquisition challenge sought quashing of notification. Court held that subsequent notification and declaration including the property rendered reliefs infructuous and dismissed the petition.
None, as the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 24TH BHADRA, 1942
WP(C).No.21852 OF 2018(F)
PETITIONER:
ALIBAVA, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. MACHINGAL HOUSE, THENNALA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.JAYASREE MANOJ
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001.
2 THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001.
3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
6 THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA REGIONAL OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673001.
7 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA NH) MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, (COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT, 1956).
R1 BY SRI.JAGADEESH LAKSHMAN, CGC R6 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY R3, R4, R7 BY SMT.A.C.VIDYA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R5-R6 BY SRI.B.G.BIDAN CHANDRAN, SC, NHAI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.21852 OF 2018(F)
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is stated to be the owner of a property having an extent of 102.05 cents of land in Survey No.315/1A of AR Nagar Village and another extent of 3.167 Ares in Survey No.315/2A of the said Village, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P1 notification dated 01.03.2018 issued by the 1st respondent under section 3A(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956, for acquisition of land for the widening of National Highway 17 (now NH-66). The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to serve on the petitioner a copy of the order that would be passed on Ext.P2 objection, on the same day of passing of the order on Ext.P2; a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider Ext.P3 alternate proposal submitted for widening of NH-17 (now NH-66) from Kolappuram to Edaikode; a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to take appropriate steps to implement Ext.P10 minutes dated 11.04.2018 of all party meeting; a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 till Ext.P10 decision is implemented.
W.P.(C) No.21852 OF 2018(F)
3
“In Sec.3A(1) notification issued as per Ext.P-1, the property of the petitioner is described as falling in “survey No.135”, “private”, “wet”, “0.1217 hectares”. The respondent NHAI would that they have described the abovesaid property of the petitioner in Ext.P-1 in that manner by showing only the survey No. without any sub division number since on their inquiries, it was revealed that the Revenue records have also been described the petitioner's petitioner only with reference to survey No. as survey No.315, etc. It presumably means that sub division number was not shown in such Revenue records. Whereas the petitioner would contend that the omission in Ext.P-1 notification to mention the sub division numbers of the petitioner's property (which is stated to be survey Nos.315/1A, 315/2A, 315/2A etc. as shown in Ext.P-13 land tax receipt) would amount to vagueness in the notification inasmuch as the material particulars of the property with reference to its sub division numbers are not shown, etc.
W.P.(C) No.21852 OF 2018(F)
4
Accordingly, it is ordered that the 7th respondent Deputy Collector will make available the details of the entries and the description of the petitioner's property coming within survey No.315 in order to ascertain whether such Revenue records described the property without sub division numbers and it is treated as “wet land” and of extent “0.1217 hectares”, etc. or whether even the sub division numbers of the said property are shown in such Revenue records. Attest photocopies of such Revenue records may also be made available for the perusal of the court.” (Sic.)
“The petitioner's property is situated in Survey Nos.315/1A and 315/2A of A.R.Nagar Village. According to the petitioner, as per Ext.P1 notification, that land is not forming part of notification for acquiring the land. However, in the guise of notification, an attempt is being made to acquire the petitioner's land as well. Therefore, the fifth respondent shall identify the land and find out whether the land belonging to the petitioner being acquired for the purpose of widening the National Highway without any notification. It is made clear that the land belonging to the petitioner shall not be acquired without identifying the same and without any notification. The respondents shall state before this Court that it is forming part of the notification and what is the actual survey number of the petitioner's property.”
W.P.(C) No.21852 OF 2018(F)
5
W.P.(C) No.21852 OF 2018(F)
6
Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN
jv
JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable given the issuance of subsequent notification and declaration including the petitioner's property.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Alibaba
Union of India
State of Kerala
Anil K.Naren dran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
