IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 28050 of 2009(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.A.AMY, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.V.U.MOHAMMED ALI, RESIDING AT PUTHENVEEDU HOUSE, P.O.WEST VELIYATHUNADU, VIA.ALANGAD, ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM SRI.C.N.GOPAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GENERAL, THRISSUR. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KODUNGALLOOR. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAVILANGU VILLAGE, KODUNGALLOOR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.V.MANOJ FOR R1-4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 28050 of 2009 A `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T This matter relates to acquisition of land for the purpose of Tsunami related rehabilitation programme. The project is funded by the Central Government. The writ petitioner challenged the notification. That was dismissed by the Division Bench on 27-05-2009 by holding in W.P.(C) No.35312/2008 that the acquisition is for a public purpose. 2. The petitioner's name does not appear in the revenue records. She filed Ext.R1(b) before the Land Acquisition Officer on 17-09-2009 stating that she came to know from her brother about the proceedings and that she has recently obtained assignment of the land claimed by her and she needs more time to produce the title deed because the same is held up in proceedings relating to request for effecting mutation following the transfer. 3. With the aforesaid scenario, the petitioner says that advance possession was taken without paying 80% of the proposed compensation and without giving her notice of WPC.28050/09 : 2 : dispossession. 4. Going by the revenue records as they stood at the relevant time, the petitioner was not shown as the owner of the land. A person interested, for the purpose of proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, is a larger concept. Yet, to compel the acquisition authority to release funds without ascertaining the title would be neither in the interest of the State nor in the interest of the lawful claimants. 5. In the aforesaid situation, the submission in the counter affidavit that on production of the proper documents, 80% of the amounts, which may be found due to the petitioner, would be released, has necessarily to be accepted as of now. The award has not been passed. Therefore, the petitioner will be entitled to produce documents and show her title even to the Land Acquisition Officer. But, in view of the fact that the funds extended by the Central Government in the project is likely to lapse, the award enquiry and the passing of the award cannot be dragged on. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, repelling all contentions of WPC.28050/09 : 3 : the writ petitioner, it is ordered that if the petitioner produces her title documents and other relevant materials in support of her claim, the Collector will consider the same and pass award. All other issues left open. No costs. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge