IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23152 of 2008(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- CHAMBA KUNJAHAMMED HAJI S/O KUNHIMOIDEEN CHAMBA HOUSE, DARSHANA TALKIES ROAD, THRIKKULAM, CHEMMAD TIRURANGADI - 676 306 BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE TIRURANGADI 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. TIRURANGADI GRAMA PANCHAYAT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TIRURANGADI P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.23152 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is that immovable property belonging in common to his father and ten other persons were acquired by the Government in the year 1954 for the construction of a Mortuary and that the petitioner's father who was one of the 11 co-owners has not been paid any compensation for the property acquired. Though the acquisition was for the construction of Mortuary, property was never used for construction of Mortuary. The Government after acquiring the property gave possession of the property to the local Panchayat and the Panchayat has been utilising the property as their own office premises after putting up buildings. Petitioner has now come to know that the Panchayat has decided to shift their office to elsewhere and has invited tenders for demolishing the buildings. The petitioner has already filed Ext.P5 representation before the District Collector requesting that the property be re-conveyed to him and also to the original co-owners of the property since the purpose of the acquisition has never been WPC.No.23152/08 2 accomplished. On this writ petition coming up for admission, Government Pleader has taken notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. Referring to Ext.P1 itself, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the property was acquired pursuant to award passed by the land acquisition officer and compensation has been determined. He submitted that in all probability the entire compensation was received by other ten co-owners who were present in India and that the grievance of non-receipt of compensation will have to be settled in a suit between the co-owners. I find considerable merit in the above submission of the learned Government Pleader. More over, it is too late for the petitioners to complain that his father who was one among the 11 co-owners did not receive any compensation for the acquired properties. As for his grievance that the acquired property has not been utislised for the purpose for which the acquisition was made, it is for the Panchayat to decide whether the Panchayat requires the property for any other purpose of its own, once the Panchayat decides that the property is not required for any public purpose whatsoever, the Panchayat will be WPC.No.23152/08 3 justified in disposing of the property, but in public auction only. However, since Ext.P5 is seen pending before the District Collector, District Collector is directed to take a decision on Ext.P5 after calling for remarks from the 4th respondent. The District Collector will hear the petitioner also before final decision is taken on Ext.P5. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.23152/08 4