IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 10888 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SHYAM SUNDAR, SON OF CHEMBAN MARAKKAMPARAMBIL, NJARAKKAL VILLAGE NJARAKKAL MURI, ELAMKUNNAPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.SHAJI GEORGE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE ERNAKULAM. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LA), GENERAL ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.K.V.MANOJ KUMAR FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 10889 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.10888/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1333 OF 1979 OF THE SUB- REGISTRY OFFICE, NJARAKKAL, DATED 16.7.1979. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1718/1979 OF THE SUB-REGISTRY OFFICE, NJARAKKAL, DATED 10.9.1979. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT, DATED 15.3.2008, PUBLISHED IN THE MANGALAM, DT.20.3.2008. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PRINT OUT TAKEN FROM THE WEB SITE, AS DISPLAYED ON 28.3.2008. http://ernakulam.nic.in/tsu.houses.asp EXT.P5: COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)NO.2707/2007/DMD ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT, DT.04.7.2007. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE DECLARATION PUBLISHED IN DESABHIMANI DAILY, DT.10.6.2008. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL.92, NO.7, DATED 10.4.2007. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.10888 & 10889 OF 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The point raised by the writ petitioners in these cases is covered against them by the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.3784/2009, which was dismissed by us on 26.5.2009. In these cases they have also raised the contention that the invocation of the emergency clause under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is unwarranted. But, the respondents would submit that the Tsunami Rehabilitation Programme is a centrally sponsored programme, which has to be completed within the time frame fixed by the Government of India. Originally, the scheme was to be implemented before 31.3.2009. Because of the delay occasioned by the Court cases, the Government of India have extended the time to complete the acquisition proceedings upto 30.6.2009 and for the implementation of the scheme up to W.P.(C).Nos.10888 & 10889/2008 2 31.12.2009. So, the invocation of the emergency clause is pre-eminently justified, it is submitted by the respondents. We find that there is substances in the submission of the respondents. The emergency clause will have to be invoked in acquisitions of this nature. We find nothing wrong or illegal about it. So, the contention of the petitioners regarding the invocation of emergency clause under Section 17(4) of the Act is repelled. In the result, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) ps