IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2008 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1930 W.A.No.2120 of 2008 ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.26242/2007 DATED 26/05/2008 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ---------------------------------------- 1. T.THANKACHI, 'DAKSHINAYIL', EZHUKONE, KOLLAM. 2. V.N.HAREENDRAN, 'SREESAILAM', EZHUKONE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A), RAILWAYS, KOLLAM. R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA. R1, R3 & R4 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.SUBIL PAUL. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------- W.A.No.2120 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 30th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. Being aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.26242 of 2007 dated 26th May, 2008, the petitioners in the writ petition have presented this writ appeal. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has rejected the request of the petitioners to issue a direction to the respondents/Railway authorities to pay compensation to their building. (2) The facts in brief are: The petitioners had filed the writ petition for a direction to the respondents to pay full compensation for the destruction of their house in view of the land acquisition proceedings for conversion of the Quilon – Punalur Railway line from meter gauge to broad gauge. The contention of the petitioners before this Court was that in similar cases the Railways have paid the full value of the building to the concerned parties. (3) The third respondent in his counter affidavit filed before this Court had contended that the Railways have no objection in giving back a portion of the property which was acquired by them for conversion of the Quilon – Punalur Railway line from meter gauge to broad gauge. W.A.No.2120 of 2008 2 They have also brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge that by Ext.P9 notice the petitioners were informed to approach the Revenue authorities for getting re-conveyance of 17.84 square metres of land acquired from them provided they have to pay back the compensation that was paid on account of the acquired property. They have also stated that the distance between the petitioners' building and the Railway line is about 21.50 metres and, therefore, there is no reason for the petitioners to apprehend that there will be possible destruction of their building. Keeping all these aspects of the matter in view, the learned Single Judge, in our opinion, has rightly rejected the writ petition. That is how the petitioners in the writ petition are before us in this writ appeal. (4) The assertion of the petitioners before this Court is that in view of the conversion of Quilon – Punalur Railway line from meter gauge to broad gauge and since the petitioners property is near the Railway line, it would cause damage to their building because of the vibration that may cause in view of the locomotives passing through the Railway line. This assertion of the petitioners was seriously disputed by the third respondent by filing their counter affidavit before this Court. Since the facts were in dispute, in our opinion, the learned Single Judge ought to have relegated the petitioners to approach the civil court for appropriate compensation by adducing enough evidence in support of their case. W.A.No.2120 of 2008 3 (5) In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion, that the learned Single Judge was justified in rejecting the writ petition. But the only thing that the learned Judge has not said in his order is that, if for any reason, the petitioners have any apprehension that because of the conversion of the Quilon – Punalur Railway line from meter gauge to broad gauge, their building would be either damaged or destroyed, they have to file an appropriate civil suit before the jurisdictional civil court. (6) In that view of the matter, while declining to entertain this writ appeal, we reserve liberty to the appellants, if they so desire, to approach the civil court for appropriate reliefs. If and when such a civil suit is filed, the learned civil Judge shall decide the prayer made in the plaint in accordance with law, without being influenced by any one of the observations made by the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition. (7) With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ appeal is disposed of. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE vns