Disposed

Koya v. the Administrator, U.T. of Lakshadweep

Kerala HC26 May 2022WP(C)/10051/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court recorded the submission that construction of the proposed road stopped in 2013 following a new Act. The writ petition challenging notices under Sections 9(1) and 9(3) of the Land Acquisition Act was closed with liberty to approach the Court again if aggrieved.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again if he is still aggrieved; writ petition closed.

Koya Vs the Administrator, U.T. of Lakshadweep — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26^TH DAY OF MAY 2022/5TH JYAISHTA, 1944

¶5

W.P.(C) NO.10051 OF 2013

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

KOYA, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. NALLAKOYA, PUTHIYA PENTAMVELI HOUSE, ANDROTH, LAKSHADWEEP. BY ADVS. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE ADMINISTRATOR, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI-682 555.

¶10

2 COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION), UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI-682 555. 3 SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, ANDROTH-682 555. BY ADVS. SRI.MANU.S, SCGC, ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V., SC, LAKSHADWEEP ADMINISTRATION

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

W.P.(C). No.10051 of 2013

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT (Dated :26^th May, 2022)

¶15

This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P4 and P5. A further direction is also sought for to drop the acquisition proceedings. As per the instruction dated 21.07.2021, sent by the Additional District Magistrate to the Senior Central Government Standing Counsel, it is reported that the construction of the proposed road has been stopped in the year 2013 with the enactment of the new Act. Recording the said submission, the writ petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again, if he is still aggrieved.

¶16

Sd/- BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE

¶17

¶18

W.P.(C). No.10051 of 2013

¶19

¶20

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10051/2013

¶21

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶22

EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO. 131/2004 DATED 31-8-2004 OF SRO ANDROTH.

¶23

EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12-9-2012 WITH SKETCH.

¶24

EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5-102012.

¶25

EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 9(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT DATED 19-3-2013.

¶26

EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 9(3) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT DATED 19-3-2013.

Koya v. the Administrator, U.T. of Lakshadweep

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koya v. the Administrator, U.T. 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

Karunakara Bhandary Vs Balakrishna Shetty

Kunhipennu Vs the State of Kerala

George P.K. Vs Secretary to Government

Thankappan Vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Vodafone Essar Cellular Ltd. Vs Kerala Stsate Pollution Control Board

P.v.Janardhanan Nambiar Vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board