IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2008 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 4675 of 2005(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MECHERI ABOOBACKER, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.ALAVI, RESIDING AT MECHERI HOUSE, THURAKKAL, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA(GENERAL), MALAPPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. BY G.P. SRI.LATHA THANKAPPAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS; EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE LAND ACQUISITION REFEENCE NO.17/90 DATED 26.8.1993 ON THE FILE OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE, MANJERI. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE FIRST RESPONDNET TO THE PETITIONER DATED 13.12.2004 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 4675 of 2005 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May , 2008 JUDGMENT In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner whose properties had been acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act challenges Ext.P2 order issued by the Land Acquisition Officer. Under Ext.P2, the petitioner is informed about the inability of the Land Acquisition Officer to entertain the application submitted by him under Section 28A of the Act for redetermination of the compensation payable to him on the basis of the court award in LAR No.17/1990 of the Subordinate Court, Manjeri which was a reference case pertaining to the acquisition under the very same Section 4(1) Notification. Significantly, in the writ petition, the petitioner does not mention the date on which the application under Section 28A was filed by him. But on conjoint reading of paragraphs 3 and 4 of the writ petition, it can be seen that the writ petitioner claims to have filed WPC No.4675/2005 2 application under Section 28A “ immediately on knowing about the decision of the reference court as evidenced from Ext.P1”. It is discernible that the petitioner's claim is only that he has submitted application for reference under Section 28A by the end of the year 1995, since there is an averment that the District Collector, Malappuram before whom the application was submitted forwarded the application to the first respondent Land Acquisition Officer on 1.1.1996. Even if it is assumed that the application under Section 28A was actually filed by the petitioner in January 1995 then also that application would have been hopelessly barred by limitation. The stand taken by the respondent is that the only application under Section 28A which was submitted by the petitioner is his application dated 22.9.2003 before the District Collector. It is that application which was forwarded by the District Collector to the Land Acquisition Officer and it is considering that application that Ext.P2 was issued. The petitioner has not produced any material before this court to show that he had filed application under Section 28A within the statutory period of limitation. The statutory period of limitation for application under Section 28A WPC No.4675/2005 3 starts from the date of court award relied on though the time taken for obtaining the certified copy of the court award would be excluded from the reckoning. Since it is clear that the petitioner did not file any application under Section 28A within the statutory period of limitation, he is not entitled for relief. The date of knowledge of the court award relied on cannot be of any relevance in an application under Section 28A, though to a certain extent, it can have some relevance in application for reference under Section 18, if it is shown that the award of the Land Acquisition Officer was passed in the absence of the awardee and if the awardee was not represented and the awardee was not served with notice under Section 12 (2) of the Act. The challenge against Ext.P2 fails and the writ petition will stand dismissed. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE dpk WPC No.4675/2005 4