IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 37365 of 2008(W)
1. ALEXANDER POTHEN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE
... Respondent
2. ADDL.SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE
4. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO LAND REVENUE
5. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO FINANCE,
6. DEPUTY COLLECTOR(LA) & LAND ACQUISITION
7. SECRETARY FOR FISHERIES,
8. SECRETARY, TOURISM INFORMATION AND
For Petitioner :SRI.R.MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :06/01/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
-----------------------
W.P.(C).No.37365 OF 2008
------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of January, 2009.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P8, the notification
issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act.
According to the petitioner, an extent of 1 acre 47.75 cents
of land was purchased by the petitioner during 1994-95.
Going by the pleadings in the writ petition, the property
was obtained by the petitioner under six documents of
title. It is stated that he wanted to construct a five star hotel
in the said property and for the said purpose, he
approached the authorities and had obtained all necessary
clearances. It was at that stage that Ext.P8 notification
under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued
by respondents on 28.4.2008.
2. On coming to know of Ext.P8, invoking the power
of the 4th respondent under Section 5A of the Land
WP(c).No.37365/08 2
Acquisition Act, the petitioner submitted Ext.P11 to the 3rd
respondent, objecting to the acquisition proceedings initiated.
It is stated that instead of making a report to the 4th
respondent, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P12 informing the
petitioner that if he needs any change in the alignment, he
should approach the respective department of the
Government. It is on receipt of Ext.P12, that the petitioner
submits that he made Ext.P10 application to the 3rd
respondent. In this writ petition the petitioner submits that
the 3rd respondent be directed to make his report to the 4th
respondent, the requisitioning authority. Along with Ext.P10,
petitioner has also produced the receipts evidencing that the
application has been duly served on all the addressees
including the 3rd respondent.
Taking into account the pendency of Ext.P10 before the
3rd respondent as above, it is ordered that the 3rd respondent
shall make his report to the 4th respondent and there upon the
4th respondent shall decide on the objection of the petitioner.
WP(c).No.37365/08 3
The 3rd respondent shall make his report within 6 weeks and
on its receipt the 4th respondent shall finally decided the
matter within 8 weeks thereafter.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before
the respondents 3 and 4 for compliance.
(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/
WP(c).No.37365/08 4
