M.Sivan vs The District Collector (Special on 14 October, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 29901 of 2008(I)


1. M.SIVAN, S/O.MADHAVAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR (SPECIAL
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :14/10/2008

 O R D E R
                         PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       W.P.(C) No.29901 of 2008
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                        Dated: 14th October, 2008

                                JUDGMENT

The grounds raised by the petitioner in this Writ Petition are

founded on the judgment of this court in Sahid v. District Collector

(1997(1) KLT 461) which is to the effect that an application under

Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act cannot be rejected as not

maintainable on the reason that certified copy of the award relied on

has not been produced along with the application. Under Exts.P2 and

P5 the respondent has informed him that it will not be possible for the

respondent to entertain Exts.P1 and P4 due to the reason of non-

production of the certified copy of the award relied on in those

applications. The judgment in Sahid v. District Collector (supra) is

certainly to the effect that an application under Section 28A cannot be

rejected as not maintainable on the reason that certified copy of the

award relied on is not produced along with the application. But at the

same time, there is no escape from the petitioner’s obligation for

producing certified copies though at least before the application is

taken up for enquiry and orders. Counsel for the petitioner submits

that the certified copies of the awards relied on in the applications

under Section 28A have been obtained and the petitioner will not

W.P.C.No.29901/08 – 2 –

have any difficulty in producing the same before the respondent.

Under the above circumstances, I dispose of the Writ Petition issuing

the following directions:

The petitioner shall produce certified copy of the award relied

on in the respective applications under Section 28A within three

weeks of receiving copy of this judgment before the respondent.

Once that is done by the petitioner, the respondent will take up both

the applications, Exts.P1 and P4, conduct necessary enquiries and

dispose of them in accordance with law at the earliest. At any rate,

award on the application shall be passed by the respondent within

three weeks of the petitioner producing certified copies of the awards.

srd                               PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE