IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 14TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 25656 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ROSAMMA, AGED 77 YEARS, W/O MATHAI, PULIYORATHU HOUSE, MANNANCHERIKUNNU, VALLIKUNNAM P.O., VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER & SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUSITION NO.11), K.R.P. & B.S.I.P, KALPATTA NORTH. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD,. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No.25656/2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of September , 2008 JUDGMENT The grievance voiced by the petitioner, whose properties were acquired under the provisions of the Land acquisition Act, is that the land acquisition officer has not so far made a reference under Section 18 to the Court for determination of the correct compensation payable for the acquired property. It is the case of the petitioner that while receiving the cheque for the original compensation, she had made an endorsement on the counter foil of the cheque to the effect that the cheque is received under protest. I assume that the petitioner in this case had received the amount under protest. The question is whether the petitioner had made an application for reference as contemplated by section 18(1) of the Act. The section envisages that the written application by the awardee. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.George Abraham submitted that Ext.P4 can be construed as an application for reference. Under the above WPC.No.25656/2008 2 circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition issuing the following directions; The land acquisition officer is directed to take up Ext.P4 immediately, consider the same as an application for reference, examine whether the same has been field within the time provided under Section 18(2) and if it is found that the application has been made within the time, allow that application and make a reference. If it is found that the application has not been made within the time, appropriate orders will be passed. If Ext.P4 is rejected on the ground of limitation by the land acquisition officer, it will be open to the petitioner to apply for redetermination under Section 28A on the basis of a relevant court award. (PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE) dpk