IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 376 of 2010()
1. JOJI PETER, EDASSERY HOUSE, LISSIE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SLAO & COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.K.G.BALASUBRAMANIAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice MR.P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :10/03/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMAN Ag. CJ &
C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.A. NO. 376 OF 2010
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
Raman, Ag. CJ.
In a land belonging to the Government, a building was constructed
by the appellant/petitioner. The said land was acquired by the National
Highway Authority of India for widening of NH 47. The question arose
for consideration was as to whether appellant/petitioner is entitled for
compensation for the building standing on a land belonging to the
Government. Since earlier, the the authorities did not quantify the amount
payable, this Court, in W.P.(C) 9675/2009 filed by the appellant, directed
the competent authority to quantify the value of the building. That has
been done. Appellant filed this writ petition for disbursement of the
amount to him. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the
ground that the appellant has to await determination of the question either
by the arbitrator or by the court as was directed in Ext.P2 judgment rendered
earlier. Hence this appeal.
2. We heard the learned counsel Sri. K.G. Balasubramanian,
appearing on behalf of the appellant as also the learned Government Pleader
WA 376/2010 2
Ms. K. Meera. The point that arises for consideration is as to whether a
person who puts up a building on a purampoke land belonging to the
Government without permission is entitled for any compensation. Learned
Government Pleader would submit that the land is surrendered to the
National Highway Authority. Therefore, they did not claim any
compensation. According to the Government Pleader, in such
circumstances, an encroacher who has put up a building thereon is not
entitled to be paid any compensation. We are not entering any finding on
this issue. As per Section 3H of the National Highways Act, if any
dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or
to any person to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the
competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the principal
civil court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the
land is situated.
3. Now, in this case, actually if only the Government is entitled for
compensation otherwise, that they could forgo the compensation. Only a
person entitled to can forgo something. On the other hand, if the appellant
is entitled for compensation, then necessarily Government cannot forgo
because they have no right to receive that compensation. Therefore, there is
a dispute between the parties.
WA 376/2010 3
4. In that view of the circumstances, we think this is a dispute falling
under subsection (4) of Section 4H of the National Highways Act, 1956.
We direct the competent authority to refer the matter to the Principal
District Court, Thrissur in terms of sub-section (4) of Section 3H of the Act
for resolution of the dispute now raised. The same shall be done on
production of a copy of this judgment by the appellant herein, which will be
done within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the same,
along with a request in that behalf to the competent authority for
information and compliance.
Therefore, the conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge for
our own reasons, as stated above, does not call for any interference. The
appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
P.R. RAMAN,
(Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE)
C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
(JUDGE).
knc/-