IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 LA.App..No. 20 of 2004(D) ------------------------- LAR.327/1998 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, N.PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT: 1ST RESPONDENT ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW.. RESPONDENTS: CLAIMANT AND ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------- 1. PAPPACHAN S/O. JACOB, PARAKKA, AKAPPARAMBU KARA, NEDUMBASSERRY VILLAGE. 2. LILLY W/O. PAPPACHAN, DO.DO. 3. KOCHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT SOCIETY, NEDUMBASSERRY. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SC, KIAS LTD. FOR R3 SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY FOR R1 & R2 THIS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2008, ALONG WITH LAA NO.156/04 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- L.A.A. Nos.20 & 156/04 & O.P.14153/1997 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 26th June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. The appeals are at the instance of the State and claimants respectively. They are aggrieved by the judgment and decree in LAR 327/98 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, North Paravur. The acquisition is for the purpose of construction of International Airport, Nedumbassery. In the nature of the view we propose to take in the matter, we do not think it necessary to refer extensively to the factual matrix. 2. The dispute essentially is of classification as far as the claimants are concerned. According to them, the lands were rightly classified under the category of dry land and myal land at the time of acquisition and on that basis, an agreement also was executed. On the basis of the agreement, the land was taken advance possession. The construction also was started. Thereafter, without notice to the claimants, the Land Acquisition LAA NO.20/04 & connected cases 2 Officer/District Collector unilaterally changed the categorization of the land from dry land to wet land. According to the claimants, the nature and lie of the property was taken into consideration by joint verification at the time of execution of the agreement and thereafter, there is no justification in changing the category and that too, without any notice to the affected parties. Though classification of the acquired property is also a matter which can be and has to be gone into by the reference court, such a consideration is not reflected in the judgment under appeal. Therefore, on that short ground, we set aside the judgment under appeal and remit the matter to the reference court with a direction to the said court to look into the grievance regarding classification with reference also to the agreement, and answer the reference afresh. We make it clear that this shall be treated as an open remand and it will be open to both sides to take all available contentions and adduce fresh evidence. The reference shall be answered within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Needless to say that the grievance of the claimants regarding insufficiency of the compensation and that of LAA NO.20/04 & connected cases 3 the State regarding excessive compensation will also be looked into by the reference court. 3. In O.P.14153/97, the petitioners/claimants are aggrieved by the unilateral decision taken by the Land Acquisition Officer/District Collector in the matter of re-classification of the acquired land, and consequential recovery. Classification of the land is also a matter which can be gone into by the reference court under Section 20 of the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, this court at this stage need not go into the contentions on merits since the application for reference is pending before the District Collector. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer/District Collector to refer LAC 429/95 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment to the reference court and the reference court is directed to look into the contentions regarding the classification also, while answering the reference. Till the reference is answered as above, the interim order passed by this court will continue. The reference shall be answered within another six months. LAA NO.20/04 & connected cases 4 I.A.115/204 in LAA 20/204 & CMP Nos.14153/97, 25406/97 & 36613/98 in OP 14153/97 : Dismissed. C.M.P.No.9301/98 in OP 14153/97 : Allowed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ ---------------------------------------------- L.A.A. Nos.20 & 156/04 & O.P.14153/1997 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 26th June, 2008.