IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 10554 of 2010(T)
1. JAWAHAR BABY ERALIL,
... Petitioner
2. JOHNSON BABY DEALIL,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA-REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
3. THE GOSHREE ISLANDS DEVELOPMENT
4. THE PALLIAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
For Petitioner :SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :08/06/2010
O R D E R
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No. 10554 of 2010-T
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2010.
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are non resident Indians. For settling in their native
place at Cherai, they have purchased an extent of 29.680 cents of land in
Pallippuram Village as per Sale Deed No.1026/96 dated 22.4.1996 of
Kuzhuppilly Sub Registry. The grievance raised in the writ petition is that
the 4th respondent Panchayat is proposing to acquire the above land for
implementing their project recommended by the third respondent Goshree
Island Development Authority for construction of a Ring Road, Tempo –
Taxi Stand and Office Complex – cum- Comfort Station.
2. The petitioners contend that the proposal was submitted by the
Panchayat without disclosing the fact that they are having an extent of
19.760 cents of land having road frontage to the Cherai – Paravur road. It
is pointed out that without moving the authorities in a proper manner, they
have directly approached the Government. It is in these circumstances, the
petitioners have filed this writ petition.
3. Ext.P7 is the copy of a representation submitted before the second
respondent District Collector and Ext.P8 is the copy of the representation
2
submitted by the petitioners before the Government itself.
4. Learned Govt. Pleader on getting instructions from the District
Collector, submitted that no requisition or Govt. Order for land acquisition
is received till date from the 4th respondent or any other agency for the said
project and no order is seen issued by the Revenue Department in this
regard and that the District Collector has not taken any steps for this project.
It is also pointed out that the proposal, if at all, is only at a primary stage. In
that view of the matter, there is nothing to adjudicate now regarding the
grievance raised by the petitioners.
5. Therefore, if the Government or any other authorities like District
Collector or Goshree Islands Development Authority at any time proceeds
to consider the request made by the 4th respondent, then the grievances
raised by the petitioners in Ext.P7, including the alternate proposal
suggested by them will be considered and before any administrative
sanction is issued.
The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. No
costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
kav/
