IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2009 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 15076 of 2009(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- K.V.STEPHEN, S/O.VARAPPAN, KOOLIYATH HOUSE, LOKAMALESWARAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY BYEPASS, KODUNGALLUR. 2. THE SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, OFFICE OF THE SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, THRISSUR. BY ADV. MR.THOMAS ANTONY, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 15076 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JUNE, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner has a complaint about the extent of land being acquired from him for the purpose of National Highway bye-pass. The acquisition is under the National Highways Act and any objections to the proposal for the acquisition of any particular parcel as regards the extent, price etc, has to be raised in terms of that Act, as duly prescribed. The petitioner's complaint is that there is conflict between the measurements of land in his possession, as measured out by the authorities under the first respondent, the competent authority and on the measurement by the Survey Superintendent viz, the second respondent. He says that the survey has shown the real extent, while the first respondent is refusing to act on such measurement. This is a dispute relatable to a property under acquisition and can be adjudicated on an application in terms of the Act before the first respondent, who has necessarily to ensure that the exact extent of land is ascertained for the purpose of determining the WP(C)15076/2009 2 compensation. Therefore, without expressing anything on merits, the petitioner is directed to appear before the first respondent on 22.6.2009, so that the said officer can hear the complaint of the petitioner, look into the files and consider the request in accordance with law, on the basis of appropriate objections duly raised in terms of the applicable statutory provisions. The status quo as on today shall be maintained, regarding the parcel of land belonging to the petitioner until the date of hearing, as fixed aforesaid and thereafter it will be regulated by such orders as may be issued by the first respondent as may be found necessary. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/15/6