IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31355 of 2009 ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. T.S. DEVIKA, 33/4147, POURNAMI, PAROPPADY,MALAPPARMBU.P.O,KOZHIKODE. 2. T.S. DHANALAKSHMI, NEELERI, EDAKKALATHIL HOUSE, KOTTULI.P.O, KOZHIKODE. 3. T.S. SHUBA, `GOKULAM', KARANGOTTU, MOOLAMPALLY MEETHAL, VENGERI, CIVIL STATION.P.O, KOZHIKODE. 4. T.S. KRIPA, PAYYADIPADINJARE PARAMBU, POOLAKKADAVU ROAD, MARIKUNNU.P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.P.J.MATHEW, MR.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN, MR.K.B.ARUNKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE, CIVIL STATION.P.O, KOZHIKODE. W.P.(C). NO.31355/2009: 4. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), KOZHIKODE, CIVIL STATION.P.O, KOZHIKODE. 5. KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. I.V. PRAMOD, R5 BY MR. K.D. BABU, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHANAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 31355 OF 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 5th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~ An item of land was acquired from the petitioners for the purpose of the 5th respondent Corporation. According to them, a parcel of land is left with them after the acquisition, which by reason of the acquisition, has become land locked and of no purpose for them. The petitioners request for a direction to the Corporation to acquire that land also. There is no provision in the Land Acquisition Act, which could be applied in favour of the petitioners, to issue such an order on the facts. This is not a case where a part of the building is being acquired. All that the petitioners can aspire is for the Corporation to decide in its executive wisdom either to buy the land in question or acquire it in terms of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Even otherwise, if the severance has resulted in land locking of the balance parcel, that may be a ground that the petitioner could agitate in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Without prejudice to such remedies, this Writ Petition is dismissed. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHANAN, JUDGE ps