IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 938 of 2011(N) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- N.J.THOMAS, CHRISTIAN, AGED 77 YEARS, SON OF N.A.JOSEPH, MANGACHIREETHIL, CHALAKUZHY ROAD, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI SRI.P.M.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM-695 004. 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR SURVEY, SURVEY DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001. 6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS DIVISION), PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM-695 004. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.938 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner in possession of 5 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.1313/1 in Madathuvilagam Village, Thiruvananathapuram. This Writ Petition has been filed mainly with the prayer to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to shift the acquisition of property for widening of Chalakuzhi Road on the opposite side of the petitioner's property and also for a direction to the respondents to consider Ext.P6 representation submitted by the petitioner carrying such a request. After the institution of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has received letter No.LA2-232/11 dated 16.2.2011 from the Special Tahsildar, the third respondent. A perusal of the same would reveal that so far, no notification has been issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for the purpose of acquisition of the property situated in the locality including that of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition can only be considered as premature. Needless to say that, in case, any notification is issued under Section 4(1) of the Land W.P.(C) NO.938/2011 2 Acquisition Act for the purpose of widening of the road in question and if the petitioner is aggrieved by any such notification, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. With the said observation, this Writ Petition is closed. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.938/2011 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010