IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 35677 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- REJI, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.GEORGE KOCHUPURAYIL HOUSE, PANDAPPALLY P.O. THOTTAKKARA, ARAKUZHA VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.SAJI RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS DIVISION, MUVATTTUPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No.35677/2008 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.3.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF the REPORT DATED 24.10.2006 FORWARDED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE S.SIRI JAGAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C)No. 35677 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of 13.368 cents of property comprised in Survey 938/10-1 in Arakuzha Village. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that respondents are trying to occupy and develop the Thodupuzha - Ramamangalam PWD Road by the side of which the petitioner's property lies, on account of acquisition of land for which, the petitioner's beneficial enjoyment of the building would be affected and the petitioner would be put to serious injury and heavy financial loss. Therefore petitioner filed Ext.P1 representation before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent after conducting the detailed enquiry, found that the petitioner's grievances are correct. Accordingly, by Ext.P2 report the 2nd respondent directed the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action in the matter. The petitioner's grievance is that the 3rd respondent is not taking appropriate action as directed in Ext.P2. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) issue of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to acquire the petitioner's residential building under Section 49 of the Land Acquisition Act; W.P(C)No. 35677 of 2008 - 2 - ii) issue of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3rd respondent to make request to the 2nd respondent to acquire the petitioner's residential building under the Land Acquisition Act;” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. In so far as the 2nd respondent has addressed Ext.P2 communication to the 3rd respondent for taking appropriate action as per the same, the 3rd respondent has a duty to comply with the directions in Ext.P2 appropriately without delay. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to take appropriate action as directed in Ext.P2 to its logical conclusion, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs