IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 27TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 4900 of 2008(G) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. T.P. HANIFA, S/O.C.MAMMU "MISBAH", MUZHATHADAM, KANNUR. 2. WOOD SHADE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. (A SUCCESSOR CONCERN OF METRO MEDICAL CENTRE) A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, WOOD ROSE, THANA KANNUR 12, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR T.P.HANIFA. 3. C.P.JAVID, S/O.LATE MUSTHAFA WOOD ROSE, THANA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. C.P.FATHIMA, AGED 14, MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER BROTHER AND GUARDIAN C.P.JAVID, S/O.LATE MUSTHAFA WOOD ROSE, THANA, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI SMT.T.V.NEEMA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A.) THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. KANNUR UNIVERSITY, MANGATTUPARAMBA KANNUR UNIVERSITY CAMPUS P.O., KANNUR 670567 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.MANU R4 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPC.4900/08 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN DESHABHIMANI DAILY IN ITS ISSUE DATED 11.3.2006. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 4(a) NOTICE DATED 31.7.06 ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER REQUIRING TO SUBMIT OBJECTIONS. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION SUBMITTED IN SEPTEMBER 2006 BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.9.06 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVT. ADDRESSED TO THE MINISTER FOR REVENUE. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 18.11.06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: A SKETCH OF THE ENTIRE LANDS. EXT.7(a): A SKETCH SHOWING THE PETITIONERS' LAND ALONE. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 5.10.06 FORWARDED TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.2.07 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED NIL AONG WITH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 9.2.07 NOTED THEREON. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 4.4.07 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 12.4.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. WPC.4900/08 EXT.P13:TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.4.07 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY. EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATD 9.6.07 ALONG WITH THE RESOLUTION ANDTHELEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE ISUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, KANNUR. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 28.9.06. EXT.P16: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29.12.07 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY. EXT.P17: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.7.09 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VICE CHANCELLOR OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY. /TRUE COPY/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.4900 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT 1.Certain land acquisition proceedings were initiated for the purpose of the Kannur University. That led to a declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which was published in the gazette dated 14.8.2007. While that decision was taken and published, the University and, as a consequence, the aquisitioning authority, had exempted lands belonging to the petitioner and one Sudha. But when the notification ultimately came, it appears that without the concurrence of the aquisitioning authority, certain other lands were also exempted from the acquisition. The Syndicate of the University, therefore, issued Ext.P16 requiring that all exemptions granted from the original proposal would stand recalled. The petitioner challenges that. WPC.4900/08 Page numbers 2.No further elaboration of facts, including defence, is required if paragraphs 3 and 4 of the counter affidavit of the University is read. Those paragraphs reads as follows: “The Syndicate of the University resolved to constitute a Sub-committee to examine and report the objections raised against the acquisition of the land at Thavakkara. The sub-committee enquired into it and submitted their report to the syndicate. In the report the sub-committee recommended to exempt the land in R.S.No.88/2 in possession of Sri.C.P.Javid and in T.S.No.108 in possession of Smt.T.K.Sudha on the condition that they hand over land needed for widening the road to 24 feet, free of cost. This proposal of the sub-committee was accepted by the Syndicate and resolved to exempt the land in T.S.No.88/2 and 108 of Kannur-1 village from acquisition which is included in 4(1) notice issued under land Acquisition Act. This information was communicated to Sri.C.P.Javid and to Smt.T.K.Sudha. They furnished their willingness to surrender sufficient land, free of cost to the University, for widening the existing road to 24 feet. The above decision of the University was communicated to the WPC.4900/08 Page numbers Special Tahsildar (LA), and the Special Tahsildar (LA), Thalassery published draft declaration in Kerala Gazette dated 14.8.2007 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act excluding the above land. As some case of exemptions of land without the knowledge and approval of the Syndicate came to the notice of the Syndicate, the Syndicate constituted a sub-committee to study the Thavakkara land acquisition file and submit a report within 24 hours (Syndicate resolution No.2007.344). The committee submitted the report and the Syndicate resolved as per decision No.2007.400 that all earlier decision/action initiated by the University for exemption of land at Thavakkara treated as cancelled and the authority be informed accordingly with immediate effect. A new proposal in form (2) including the survey number 88/2, 100, 104 and 108 submitted to District Collector, Kannur with other records for acquisition. The petitioner also informed of the Syndicate decision”. 3.Evidently, that decision to cancel the exemptions granted to the properties of the petitioner and Smt.Sudha was made WPC.4900/08 Page numbers without any independent application of mind and the cancellation of those exemptions has been made as if those exemptions stood without the sanction of the University. This is essentially a mistake of fact. There is nothing in the counter affidavit which shows that the University ever decided to withdraw from the decision consciously taken earlier to exempt the lands of the petitioner and Smt.Sudha. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is ordered holding that Ext.P16 will not, in any manner, take off the exemption granted to the property of the petitioner. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.26/9.