IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17812 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ROSY, W/O.LATE DAVID, KANNAMPUZHA HOUSE, NJARAKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. JOSEPH, S/O.LATE DAVID, KANNAMPUZHA HOUSE, NJARAKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN SMT.NITA.N.S. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, KOCHI TALUK, FORT KOCHI. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) GENERAL, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI K.V.MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.17812/2010-B ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners herein are owners of different items of properties in Nayarambalam Village. Certain extent of the land in Nayarambalam Panchayat was proposed to be acquired for rehabilitation of Tsunami affected persons in the area. Earlier, negotiations were made with the concerned parties by the official respondents and, petitioners were also approached. They offered their entire land agreeing for compensation of amount. It is pointed out that when the amount of compensation was fixed, it was on a lower side, but they accepted it. Representations were filed by the petitioners later in the matter seeking a higher amount which have been produced as Exts.P4 and P5. On coming to know that a small portion of the land alone is now notified for acquisition, they filed a further representation objecting to the above proposal as per Ext.P6. Ext.P7 is the copy of the notice under Section 9(3) of the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C).No.26919/2009 which was disposed of by Ext.P8 Judgment. The only direction therein is to the official respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and issue orders, if necessary by modifying the W.P.(C). No.17812/2010 -:2:- awards. Ext.P9 is the final communication issued in this matter wherein it is mentioned that the award has been passed already and as possession has already been taken nothing can be done to modify the award. They seek for various reliefs in this writ petition. 2. The learned Government Pleader submitted that as the award has been passed already and possession of the properties has already been taken, the challenge against Ext.P9 cannot be maintained in this writ petition. 3. It is strenuously argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the remaining properties are affected badly and the value of the properties has considerably been reduced by the acquisition. Obviously this cannot be a matter for this Court to consider in a writ petition. 4. It is not a case where the petitioners are challenging the acquisition on well known grounds like want of public purpose or mala fides on the part of the Government or the officials concerned. The demand now made that the entire properties should have been acquired cannot also be considered by this Court in a writ petition. If there are other factors which require the consideration of a claim for enhanced compensation, namely, for injurious W.P.(C). No.17812/2010 -:3:- affection etc. that is a matter which the petitioners will have to raise by seeking reference before the authorities concerned under Land Acquisition Act, to the Civil Court. Leaving open the said remedy, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms