IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 34035 of 2010(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ P.SAROJAM, D/O.P.PONNAMMA, AGED 67 YEARS, T.C.31/1606, VARUVILAKATHU VEEDU, MUNNAMANAKKAL, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-24. BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (R&B), PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION BUILDINGS, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION), DISTRICT COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED SHAFI.M. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/08/2011,ALONG WITH WPC NO. 24832 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.34035/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE OF AWARD DATED 24/02/2007 IN LAC NO.507/2006 P2 COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 27/03/2008 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NOS.14768/2004 AND 7629/2008 P3 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.K4-17796/04 DATED 24/09/2010 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos. 34035 of 2010 & 24832/2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of August 2011. JUDGMENT Common issues are involved in the writ petitions and therefore both cases were heard together and disposed of by the common judgment. 2. The facts averred in W.P.C. 24832/2010 and Exhibits produced therein are referred to hereunder. This writ petition is filed for a direction commanding the respondents to disburse to the first petitioner the amounts received from out of the sale of the improvements effected by the first petitioner in her property acquired by the respondents and forming subject matter of LAC/507/06 and for commanding the respondents to disburse to the petitioner the amount received from out of the sale of the improvements effected by the petitioners in their respective W.P.(C) No.34035/2011 & Con.case. 2 properties. Identical reliefs are sought in the connected writ petition. 3. The land belonged to the petitioners were acquired for the purpose of Pallimukku- Anayara Road widening Project. The 4th respondent Land Acquisition Officer on 24.2.2007 passed an award assessing the compensation payable to the petitioners in the respective cases. Petitioners were awarded land value alone. No amount was paid for the improvements effected by the petitioners in their respective properties. Petitioners and others filed W.P.(C) No.7629/08 and connected cases challenging the notification published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. This Court by judgment dated 27th March 2008 disposed of both cases. Ext.P1 is the copy of the judgment. Petitioners in Ext.P1 writ petition challenged the legality of the notification issued for acquisition of their properties. it is also brought to the notice of the Court that the Award passed by the 4th respondent is with respect to the land value only and W.P.(C) No.34035/2011 & Con.case. 3 improvements were not assessed and no amount was awarded towards the value of improvements. Taking note of the aforesaid facts, this Court disposed of the writ petition by issuing certain directions. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows. “The respondents can take possession of the properties in W.P.(C) No.14768 of 2004 which are situated in the northern side of the proposed Railway Over Bridge only after issuing Section 4(1) notification in respect of the properties situated on the southern side. It is made clear that after issuing the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, possession of properties involved in both these Writ Petitions can be taken. The competent authority shall value the improvements effected by the persons in possession of land to be taken possession such as building, gate, compound wall etc. In case any dispute arises regarding the value so fixed, the same shall be referred to the Land Acquisition Court for determining that point. The Government should expedite the acquisition proceedings in respect of the properties situated on the southern side of the proposed Railway Over Bridge and required for the construction of the approach road to the proposed Railway Over Bridge”. 4. The above quoted operative portion of the judgment shows that the direction is issued by this Court to the 4th W.P.(C) No.34035/2011 & Con.case. 4 respondent to asses the value of improvements effected by persons in possession of land such as building, gate, compound wall etc. There is a further direction that in case any dispute arises regarding valuation of the same shall be referred to the Land Acquisition Court for determining that point. 5. This Court, finding that the value of improvements was not awarded to the petitioners, directed the competent authority to value the improvements. This Court further direct that if the petitioners have any grievance as to adequacy of the value so fixed, they can prefer application for reference to the Land Acquisition Court and in that case the same shall be referred to the Land Acquisition Court for determining the additional compensation claimed. On going through the directions issued in the operative portion of the judgment cited above, it is clear that direction to asses improvements ordered and further direction for reference on request would show that the amount fixed as value of improvements shall be paid to the petitioners. W.P.(C) No.34035/2011 & Con.case. 5 6. In the statement filed by the 4th respondent it is stated that the structures belonging to the petitioners in W.P.(C) 24832/10 is valued. It is further stated that the value assessed for the improvements belonging to the first petitioner at Rs. 1,17,902/- and the value of improvements to the 2nd petitioner is assessed at Rs. 28,614/-. It is further stated in the statements that these amounts are not included in the award amount. It is not stated in the counter affidavit or statement as to the amount fixed for the value of improvements due to the petitioner in W.P.(C) 34035/10. 7. Taking into account of the facts that the value of improvements was not paid to the petitioner and in the light of the directions of this Court in Ext.P1 judgment, the respondents shall disburse the amounts assessed as the value of improvements. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they are seeking disbursement of the amount assessed by the 4th W.P.(C) No.34035/2011 & Con.case. 6 respondent and they do not proposes to file any application for reference or enhancement of the compensation fixed by the 4th respondent. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is recorded. Therefore, these writ petitions are allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents 3 and 4 to disburse to the first petitioner in W.P.(C) 24832/10 Rs. 1,17,902 and to the 2nd petitioner Rs. 28,614/- and the amount(quantum is not known) assessed for the value of improvements due to the petitioners in W.P.(C). 34035/10 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. These writ petitions are disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE al