IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 11347 of 2010(P)
1. P.C.MATHEW,S/O.LATE PLEMEENA, AGED 72,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA)
... Respondent
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY & LAND
3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :31/03/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 11347 OF 2010 (P)
=====================
Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010
J U D G M E N T
According to the petitioner, as per Ext.P1, his mother was
having title over 43.500 cents of land in Mulavukad Village of
Kanayannur Taluk. His mother died intestate, as a result of which,
the title to the property devolved on her legal representatives.
2. It is stated that in the meanwhile, for the purpose of
construction of Goshree Bridge, the land was acquired. However,
for the reason that his mother was no more, the names of her
legal representatives were not included in the list of persons from
whom property was acquired. Thereupon, they approached this
Court and secured Ext.P13 judgment, by which the matter was
directed to be reconsidered. On the basis of the judgment,
Ext.P14 order was passed, as a result of which, petitioner submits
that himself and other legal representatives of his deceased
mother are entitled to be paid compensation due for the 43.500
cents that was acquired.
3. Compensation was not paid, and therefore, he filed
Ext.P15 before the 1st respondent. Complaint in this writ petition is
WPC No. 11347/10
:2 :
that even the representation remains unattended. It is with this
grievance, the writ petition is filed.
4. Thus essentially the claim of the petitioner and others
is for compensation for the land acquired from his mother. If by
virtue of Ext.P1, P13 judgment and P14 order, petitioner and the
other legal representatives of his deceased mother are
recognised as the persons eligible to be paid compensation for
the land, there is no reason why the 1st respondent should not
consider Ext.P15.
5. Having regard to the case of the petitioner regarding
the pendency of Ext.P15, it is directed that the 1st respondent
shall consider the said representation in accordance with law and
pass appropriate orders in the matter. This shall be done, as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of
production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this
writ petition.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp