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 TUESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2008 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 W.A.No.1836 of 2008 ------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.24364/2008-A, DATED 25/08/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER:- ---------------------------------------- SHRI UJJAYINI MAHAKALI AMMAN DEVASTHANAM, PUTHENCHANTHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MR.A.RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.S.AYYAN PERUMAL, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.M.R.A.86, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS:- ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, JAYA MANSION, VAZHUTHACAUD, SASTHAMANGALAM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-10. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. W.A.No.1836 of 2008 - 2 - ADDL.4TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED: ------------------------------------------------------- ADDL.R4. V.N.JAYAKUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, VISWAMBRAHMANA VILASAM MANDIRAM, LUKE'S LANE, PUTHEN CHANTHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (ADDITIONAL 4TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21.10.2008 IN I.A.NO.915 OF 2008) R1 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.K.A.JALEEL. R2 & R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA. R4 BY ADV.SRI.A.KRISHNAN. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.Dattu,C.J. & A.K.Basheer,J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1836 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 9th December, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu,C.J. Appellant-petitioner is the Trustee of a temple - Shri Ujjayini Mahakali Amman Devasthanam. In the writ petition filed, the Trustee had called in question the acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents. (2) The acquisition was made for the purpose of widening of the road. (3) The State Government, in order to provide alternate land to the temple, had issued Exhibit P9 notification. In that, had directed the Trivandrum Development Authority (“TRIDA” for short) to acquire 1.81 cents of land from the adjoining property lying in the backside of the temple, in lieu of the land acquired from the temple property. (4) Aggrieved by the said Exhibit P9 orders/notification, the contesting respondent/owner of the land, was before this Court in W.P.(C). No.12388 of 2008. This Court had disposed of the writ petition, by order dated 9th April, 2008. In that, the learned Single Judge, without interfering with Exhibit P9 order passed by the State Government, had only directed the State Government and its authorities to consider Exhibit P6 representation filed by the owner of the land. W.A.No.1836 of 2008 - 2 - (5) After disposal of the writ petition, there was a meeting held on 11.6.2008, which was presided over by the Honourable Minister for Law and also other authorities, including the Chairman of TRIDA, the District Collector, Secretary of TRIDA, the appellant herein, etc. In the said meeting, it was resolved, that, for the purpose of providing alternate land to the temple, only 0.63 cents may be acquired from the adjoining property in lieu of 1.81 cents of land and to give compensation to the remaining portion of the land acquired from the temple. (6) The petitioner-Trustee, in the writ petition filed, had sought for a direction to the respondents to implement Exhibit P9 order and also to direct the respondents to acquire and provide sufficient land from Survey No.1318/P of Vanchiyoor Village lying adjacent on the western side of the premises of the temple. (7) The learned Single Judge, in view of the resolution passed in the presence of the petitioner, dated 11.6.2008, has rejected the writ petition. That is how the petitioner is before us in this appeal. (8) The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit, that, in the meeting held on 11.6.2008, the Trustee of the temple had demanded one cent of property in lieu of 1.81 cents acquired from the temple for the development of the road. (9) After a discussion, the authorities have decided to acquire only 0.63 cents of land from the adjoining property belonging to the W.A.No.1836 of 2008 - 3 - additional 4th respondent so as to provide alternate land to the temple in lieu of 1.81 cents of land acquired from the temple and to give compensation to the remaining portion of the land acquired from the temple. Having accepted the resolution dated 11.6.2008, it is not open to the appellant-petitioner, now, to come before this Court and contend, that, for the shifting of the temple at least one cent of land requires to be acquired from the property in Survey No.1318/P of Vanchiyoor Village. (10) After carefully considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the opinion, that, the learned Single Judge was justified in relying upon the resolution passed on 11.6.2008 and to dispose of the writ petition. We do not see any merit in the Writ Appeal filed by the appellant. Therefore, the Writ Appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice A.K.Basheer vku/- Judge