High Court Kerala High Court

M.C.Poulose vs The District Collector on 20 August, 2007

Kerala High Court
M.C.Poulose vs The District Collector on 20 August, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 3704 of 2007(N)


1. M.C.POULOSE, AGED 60, S/O.CHACKO,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SIVAKUMAR P.N., S/O. NARAYANAN,

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,

3. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PANANCHERY VILLAGE

5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PEECHI VILLAGE

6. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

                For Respondent  :SRI. AJITH KRISHNAN, ADDL.CGSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.PADMANABHAN NAIR

 Dated :20/08/2007

 O R D E R
                               K. PADMANABHAN NAIR ,J
                          -------------------------------------------------
                                 W.P.(C) No.3704 of 2007 N
                          -------------------------------------------------
                        Dated, this the 20th day of August, 2007
                                         JUDGMENT

Heard.

2. Learned standing counsel appearing for the National Highway Authority

submits that the proceedings challenged in this Writ Petition is not a proceedings under

the Land Acquisition Act but under the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’).

It is submitted that notification under Section 3A(1) of the Act was published in the

Gazette of India as early as on 21.10.2005 for which nobody had filed any objection. It is

submitted that the above notification was published in ‘Malayala Manorama daily’ dated

24.11.2005 and ‘The Hindu’ dated 24.12.2005 and now notice under Section 3D(1) of the

Act was issued. It is also submitted that the Central Government had issued a

notification on receipt of the report from the competent authority. Thereafter a notice

under Section 3G(3) of the Act was issued for the purpose of assessing the land value

and value of improvements. In view of the non-filing of objections to the notifications it

is not possible to interfere with the proceedings initiated by the National Highway

Authorities. There is no merit in the Writ Petition. It is only to be dismissed.

In the result, Writ Petition is dismissed.

K. PADMANABHAN NAIR
JUDGE

cks