IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 3708 of 2011(K) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. JOSE, S/O.JOSEPH, PARAPPILLY HOUSE, KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. ANTONY, S/O.JOSEPH, PARAPILLY HOUSE, KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. TOMY S/O.JOSEPH, PARAPILLY HOUSE, KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.C.P.WILSON MS.ROSE MICHAEL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) IDAMALAYAR IRRIGATION PROJECT ANGAMALY, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (K.I.A.) NEDUMBASSERY. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE SECRETARY, BOARD OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 5. SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANKRIT, KALADY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BIJU MEENATTOOR FOR R1 TO R4. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN,SC,SANKARACHA.UTY FOR R5 SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/10/2011, THE COURT ON 24/10/2011 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 3708 of 2011(K) APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: NOTICE NO.B1-66/93 DTD. 4.9.93 ISSUED BY R1. EXT.P2: COMMUNICATION NO.E.O.1/SSUS/94 DTD. 4.10.95 AND E.O.1/SSUS/94 DTD. 1.1.96 SENT BY R5 TO R2. EXT.P3: AWARD NOTICE DTD. 1.7.96 ISSUED BY R1 TO THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 12(2) OF L.A ACT. EXT.P4: NOTICE DTD. 2.8.95 ISSUED BY R1 AS PER RULE 15(3) DIRECTING THE PEITITONERS TO VACATE THE PROPERTY. EXT.P5: JUDGMENT DTD. 7.7.2010 IN W.P.(C).NO.8927/10 OF THIS COURT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5(a): JUDGMENT DTD. 6.7.2000 IN O.P.NO.19904/97. .... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: i) To issue a writ of certiorari or such other writ, order or direction to quash Ext.P3 Award No.196/95 dated 1.7.1996 in L.A.C.No.40/93 of the petitioners' property in view of the failure of the 1st, 2nd and 5th respondents to pay or deposit the awarded amount within the time. ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction directing the respondents to publish a fresh 4(1) notification for acquiring the petitioners' property in view of the finding that the land and buildings within it acquired U/s 4(1) of the Act dated 17.8.93 under urgency clause initiated by the 1st respondent is still lying as it is without making any improvements therein. iii) To declare that the entire land acquisition proceedings are lapsed as it does not attract the provision of emergency clause whereas the possession was not taken over by the 5th respondent from the 1st respondent and direct the respondents to relinquish the right over the land acquired. ::2:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 2. An extent of 11.40 Ares of land in survey No.379/18 and 0.60 Ares in survey No.379/26 of Kalady Village, Aluva Taluk belonging to the petitioners was acquired for Sree Sankaracharya Sanskrit University. Combined notification under Sections 4(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act was published during July, 1993. The award enquiry was conducted on 12.7.1995. In response to the notice under Section 9(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, the petitioners filed claim statement. Award No.196/95 in L.A.C.No.40/93 has been passed on 1.7.1996. Petitioners submit that possession was taken on 2.8.95. An amount of Rs.6,84,264/- as compensation was awarded as per Award No.196/95. Ext.P3 is the copy of the award notice dated 1.7.96. It is averred in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that due to some unavoidable circumstances and inconvenience the petitioners could not appear before the authority and failed to receive the compensation. It is admitted that the petitioner failed to receive the compensation in time. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after 15 years of passing the award and dispossession the respondents ::3:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 are left without paying the award amount and therefore they have filed W.P(C).No.8927/2010 for appropriate reliefs. Ext.P5 is the copy of the judgment in W.P.(C).No.8927/2010. The relief sought for in the the said writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent Special Tahsildar (LA) to consider Ext.P6 representation and to pay the award of compensation as per Award No.196/95 in L.A.C.No.40/93 without any delay. The said writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P5 judgment directing the 5th respondent, namely, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, to deposit the amount covered by the award for payment to the petitioners, within a period of three months and on such deposit, the 1st respondent will take steps to see that the amount is paid to the petitioners without any further delay. The claim for payment of interest is left open. 4. Placing reliance on Section 31(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award and on their refusal to receive or accept the same, the ::4:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 Collector has no option but to put the compensation amount awarded by him in civil deposit, that is in deposit in court and that if the compensation is not paid or deposited the award will be invalid. It is contended that in the above said circumstances, the petitioners are seeking remedy on the basis of Section 31(1) of the Act. Therefore, the petitioners contended that the award and notification have become invalid and liable to be quashed. 5. Respondents 1 & 5 filed separate counter affidavits. In this case Award No.196/95 in L.A.C.No.40/93 was passed on 1.7.96. in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent it is stated that the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit Men's hostel is functioning in the acquired land, that the petitioners submitted an application for payment of the award amount on 13.10.2009 and in response to that funds has been requested from the requisitioning authority, that as per the decision of this Court in W.P.(C).No.8927/2010 (Ext.P5), the 1st respondent requested the 5th respondent to deposit the amount covered by the award for payment to the petitioners, that the requisitioning authority had allotted the award amount of ::5:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 Rs.6,84,264/- and the same was received on 18.11.2010, that the amount was credited to the work deposit on 23.11.2010 and the Chalan received on 9.12.2010. On depositing the amount a notice was sent to the petitioners by post to appear with original document, encumbrance certificate etc. before the Land Acquisition Officer on 14.12.2010. The petitioners did not appear. Again notice was served on 10.1.2011. It is said that there is no response from the petitioners so far. It is further stated that since the petitioners have not appeared with the original documents and encumbrance certificate steps are being taken to keep the amount in revenue deposit. 6. In paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent it is stated that the award was passed on 1.7.96 and a notice in form No.10(b) Rule 13(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued stating the compensation awarded will be paid to them after the land taken in advance possession and handed over to the Requisition Authority as per Section 47 of the Land Acquisition Act, that the notice was served to the petitioners on 10.7.96, that they filed O.P.Nos.11526/96 & 19904/97 before ::6:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 this Court and that in the judgment dated 6.7.2000 in W.P.(C). No.19904/97 this Court observed that it is for the petitioners to file a representation before the University for their consideration to return the land on such condition if they do not want the land any more and that there is no legal right for the petitioners to claim as it is already vested in the Government. In the report received by the 1st respondent from the University on 4.9.2001, it is stated that “in the matter University is not in a position to entertain the request of the petitioners for the reason that various infrastructural and other development projects proposed are going on, by taking the view that the land already taken and in possession of the University cannot be transferred”. It is further reported that therefore, no action is required at the stage. Subsequently, petitioners filed W.P.(C).No.8927/2010. 7. As per Ext.P5 judgment in the said case, this Court directed the University to deposit the amount of award within three months. Though notice was served on 14.10.2010 the petitioners did not appear with the original documents, encumbrance certificate etc. before the Land Acquisition Officer ::7:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 for receiving the award amount. Again notice was sent on 10.1.2011 and it is stated that there is no response from the petitioners so far. It is admitted by the petitioners in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that due to some unavoidable circumstances and inconvenience the petitioners could not appear before the authority and failed to receive the compensation. It is further admitted that the petitioners did not receive the compensation in time. 8. In 2010, the petitioners filed W.P.(C).No.8927/2010. The relief sought for in the said writ petition was for a direction to consider Ext.P6 representation and to pay the compensation amount awarded to the petitioners as per Award No.196/95 in L.A.C.No.40/93 without any delay. In fact, this Court allowed the prayer and directed the 5th respondent to deposit the award amount within three months and to pay the amount to the petitioner and further directed the 1st respondent to disburse the amount to the petitioners. In spite of notices issued pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in the judgment, petitioners neither appeared with the necessary documents nor did any ::8:: W.P.(C).No.3708 Of 2011 action to receive the amount. Even in 2010, the relief sought for by the petitioners is for a direction to pay the amount without further delay. In response to the direction issued by this Court, the requisitioning authority deposited the amount. The 1st respondent issued notices, but, the petitioners, till date, have not appeared before the 1st respondent and received the amount awarded. In these circumstances, there is no justification for the petitioners to approach this Court again with altogether different reliefs. The writ petition is devoid of any merit and accordingly, dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to receive the compensation awarded. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-