IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 1ST AUGUST 2011 / 10TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 25966 of 2010(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ELIYA, D/O. THRESSIA, AGED 75 YEARS, ANTHIRI HOUSE, NELLAYI P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), N.H.D.P.UNIT NO.II, THRISSUR-20. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, S.L.A.O., AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY (L.A.), N.H.D.P., CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR-680 020. 3. THE ARBITRATOR (NH ACT 1956) AND THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 003. 4. THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR, PALAKKAD.PIN-678 001 R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.RAMESH R4 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.25966/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 22/5/2007 IN LAC NO.324/2006 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2 COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S 3G(5) OF THE N.H. ACT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3 COPY O FTHE JUDGMENT DATED 4/8/2008 IN WP(C)NO.22096/2008 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. P4 COPY OF THE AWARD DATED 17/10/2008 ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).No.25966 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 1st day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P4 award dated 17.10.2008 of the 3rd respondent and for a direction directing the 4th respondent to grant an additional compensation of Rs.20 Lakhs to the petitioner as claimed in Ext.P2. 2. An extent of 0.0159 Hectors of land and a building thereon in survey No.335/8 of Nellayi Village belonging to the petitioner was acquired as per proceedings in L.A.C.No.324/2006 of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent passed as award granting Rs.5,18,898/- as compensation. Ext.P1 is the copy of the award dated 22.5.2007. Aggrieved by the quantum of award, the petitioner on 7.6.2007 submitted an application for reference and re-determination of the award by the arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. Ext.P2 is the copy of the application filed under Section 3G(5) of the N.H Act. The award passed by the 3rd respondent dated 17.10.2008 is produced and marked as Ext.P4. The 3rd respondent by award ::2:: W.P.(C).No.25966 Of 2010 No.161/2008 held that the award passed by the 2nd respondent is just and reasonable and rejected the claim for enhancement of compensation. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P4 award is a non-speaking award, since no reasons are stated for rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The 4th respondent contended that the petitioner had failed to produce any materials in support of his claim for enhancement of compensation and therefore the 3rd respondent has rightly rejected the claim. 4. The 3rd respondent Arbitrator examined Ext.P2 application submitted by the petitioner in the light of the materials on record. The 3rd respondent found that the Special Land Acquisition officer fixed the land value after considering all the documents executed within a period of three years prior to the notification and situated within a radius of 5 Km. Regarding the value of structures, it is reported that the structural value was calculated by the approved valuer based on PWD rates of valuation and the valuation was verified and approved by ::3:: W.P.(C).No.25966 Of 2010 National Highway Authority of India. In these circumstances, there is no substance in the argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Ext.P4 order is bad for non- application of mind. The petitioner did not adduce any additional materials before the 4th respondent in support of his claim for enhanced compensation. 5. Before this Court, the petitioner produced the Award No.63/2011 dated 25.4.2011 passed by the Arbitrator, National Highways Act, 1956. The said document is marked as Ext.P5. Ext.P5 award relates to the property acquired under the very same notification and is located very near to the acquired property with similar features and importance. It is submitted at the Bar that land value fixed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer in Ext.P5 and the present case is the same amount. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to enhanced compensation taking into account the value of the adjacent property for which enhanced compensation was awarded as per Ext.P5 order. It is not disputed that the property covered by ::4:: W.P.(C).No.25966 Of 2010 Ext.P5 award and the property under acquisition are properties lying in the same village for which the very same land value was awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The said circumstance would indicate that both properties are having similar features and same importance. For the ends of justice, this case also requires reconsideration, in the light of Ext.P5 award. 6. Accordingly, Ext.P4 award is set aside. There will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 application afresh, taking into consideration Ext.P5 award passed in a similar case and other materials if any, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-