IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 37334 of 2009(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. T.J. PHILOMINA, ETTIRUTHIL HOUSE, PULLEPPADY, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-692 018. 2. E.R. JOHN BOSCO, -DO-, -DO-. 3. MINI JOHN, -DO-. 4. MARY GERTRUDE, -DO-. 5. E.R. PAULSON, -DO-. 6. ANN JENNY, -DO-. 7. HIMA TONY, -DO-. 8. VIN JOHN, -DO-. BY ADV. MR.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.M.A. AZIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 37334/2009-J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE OF THE PROPERTY AND FACTORIES. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE AREA DEMARCATED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09/04/2008 IN WP(C) NO. 11627/2008 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18/10/2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/11/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.37334/2009-J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 1st day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by Ext.P7 order passed by the first respondent. It is mainly contended that the order is passed without hearing the petitioners. 2. As per Ext.P7 order, it was held by the Government that the petitioners' land is most suitable for the requirement of the Kochi Metro Rail Project and the vacant plots suggested by the petitioners are not suitable for the same. 3. Ext.P3 herein is the representation considered by the Government in Ext.P7. Mainly, the objection raised in Ext.P3 is with regard to the acquisition of their property for the purpose of Metro Rail Project as they have established various industries spending more than Rs.5 Crores. By Ext.P4 Judgment this Court directed the respondent to hear the petitioners and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation. Subsequently, a notice was issued, as per Ext.P5, proposing a hearing to be held on 19/10/2009. On the previous day, they submitted Ext.P6 request to defer the hearing scheduled on 19/10/2009 pending a decision on the report of the District Collector, W.P.(C). No.37334/2009 -:2:- Ernakulam, called for by the Industries Department. There is no mentioning in Ext.P7 about the receipt of Ext.P6 representation. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that it was directly submitted to the Department itself. 4. What is sought for by the petitioners is for a fresh hearing in respect of the facts pointed out in Ext.P6. The suggestion made in Ext.P6 before the Industries Department is to shift the location of the Dumping Yard from their place to another waste land lying next to their property, so that the Industry that is being conducted in their property could be saved and to protect the employment of 300 workers employed there. It is also submitted that no hearing has been conducted in the matter also. 5. I am of the view that the petitioners can be given an opportunity of hearing, especially in the light of Ext.P4 Judgment. Therefore, Ext.P7 is quashed. There will be a direction to the respondent to dispose of the matter after hearing the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms