IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 16TH BHADRA 1931 WA.No. 1922 of 2009 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMEN IN WPC.9405/2009 Dated 24/03/2009 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ ELIYOTT MADHAVI,D/O.LATE CHIRI, AGED 62 YEARS,ECHILAMVAYAL, P.O.VELLUR,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDNETS ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KANNUR. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR(L.A), NAVAL ACADEMY, PAYYANNUR. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1922 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. Challenging Ext.P5, the petitioner-appellant approached this Court with the following reliefs: “i) to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P5, ii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to re-consider Exhibit P1 application on merit after affording an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard; iii) to declare that the petitioner is legally competent and entitled to make application for re-determination of compensation in respect of 1 acre of property comprised in R.S.355/1 of Ramanthali Village acquired from late grandmother of the petitioner, Manikyam.” W.A.No.1922 of 2009. - 2 - 2. The learned Single Judge taking note of two things, namely delay and laches and non use of availability of forum of application under Section 28A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the Act' for short), dismissed the writ petition. 3. It is to be noted that Ext.P1 application was filed on 28.4.1998 alleging that land in R.S.No.355/1 of Ramanthali Village with residential building was acquired for the Naval Academy, Payyanur and as the compensation was inadequate, in the light of the provisions contained in Section 28A of the Act, the same may be redetermined. This representation of the petitioner was considered by the authority and in a proceeding as per Ext.P5 it was held that as no land in respect of R.S.No.355/1 has been acquired for the public purpose, his claim cannot be considered. Even though Ext.P5 order was passed on 11.12.2007, the petitioner has approached this Court in this writ petition only in the year 2009 and as such on this W.A.No.1922 of 2009. - 3 - ground the learned Single Judge, in our view, rightly held that the writ petition must fail only because of the delay and laches. Even otherwise, as the petitioner-appellant had a remedy of approaching the District Collector as per Section 28A(3) of the Act and having failed to take steps within the time prescribed, was disentitled for any relief. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of the records, we do not see any justifiable ground to hold that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is either illegal or arbitrary. Hence we find no merit in the writ appeal and it is accordingly dismissed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K. Basheer, Judge vns