IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2007 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 10824 of 2007(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- D.REGHU, S/O.DAMODARAN, AGED 47 YEARS, R.R.VILASOM, VAMANAPURAM POST, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, SOUTHERN CIRCLE, L.A., P.W.D., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.10824/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24/3/2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 12/4/2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 17/4/2006 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26/4/2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 11/5/2004 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 10824 of 2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT The learned Government Pleader has placed before me the the entire file and I have gone through the same. The file reveals that the only request, which was made by the petitioner on receiving notice under Section 12 (2), was for release of the compensation amount to him. The file contains another letter dated 18/11/2004 submitted by the petitioner after he received the compensation amount. Request in that letter is only that the title document be released to him since the same pertains to other properties also. It is thus clear that the petitioner never filed application seeking reference for determination of the correct compensation. May be it is true that the petitioner protested orally regarding the adequacy of the compensation. But that is not enough. The petitioner ought to have applied for reference. This writ petition will stand dismissed. It is made clear that WPC.No.10824/2007 2 it is always open to the petitioner to apply for redetermination under section 28(A) on the basis of a relevant court award passed in respect of other properties acquired pursuant to the very same Section 4 (1) notification. (PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE) dpk