IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14457 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RASHEED KHAN, S/O.MUHAMMED HANEEFA, PADINJATTEVEEDU, KUTTIKKADA.P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE SPECIAL THAHASILDAR(LA) NO.1, KOLLAM. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.14457/2010-F ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 8th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein was the owner of a landed property to an extent of 1 acre and 3 cents (42 ares) comprised in Old Survey No.5621A, 5621B, 5645 (Re- Survey No.632/14 in Block No.25) of Eravipuram Village. It is mentioned that out of the total extent, 2 cents at the Eastern extremity is puramboke land. 2. For rehabilitation of Tsunami affected people, various items of properties were acquired as per the Gazette Notification dated 10/10/2007. The total extent sought to be acquired is 41.15 ares from the petitioner. The petitioner's wife moved the District Collector for releasing a part of the property from the Land Acquisition proceedings. It is averred in the writ petition that the first respondent exempted only 11 cents of property at the Eastern extremity of 41.15 ares acquired. There were proceedings pending before the Government seeking for exemption and that was rejected by Ext.P1 order. A writ petition was filed as W.P.(C). No.14457/2010 -:2:- W.P.(C).No.37667/2008 challenging Ext.P1 order, which was dismissed. 3. According to the petitioner, even though the first respondent had exempted 11 cents of property from acquisition, respondent Nos.2 to 4 had only measured 9 cents. The third respondent came to the property and measured only 9 cents as exempted portion, leaving 2 cents on the Eastern vicinity stating that it is puramboke land. According to the petitioner, 2 cents also are in possession and enjoyment of the petitioner. 4. The complaint thus raised is that 11 cents of property which were exempted have not been earmarked so far. 5. It is upto the respondents to verify the above aspects with reference to the details of the documents in favour of the petitioner and other aspects relating to his claim for possession of the 2 cents. 6. The writ petition is filed seeking for various directions including direction commanding the respondents to fix boundary for 11 cents of property and not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of 11 cents of property. W.P.(C). No.14457/2010 -:3:- 7. There will be a direction to the second respondent to enquire into the matter to find out whether the 11 cents exempted have been earmarked physically by the Officers concerned. The petitioner will file appropriate representations before the second respondent along with documents, plans etc., which will be considered by the second respondent with reference to the revenue records and the mahazar etc. prepared by the third and fourth respondents. Appropriate decision will be taken after hearing the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The petitioner will produce copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this Judgment before the second respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE