IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22443 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ DEEPA.K, W/O.BINIL ROY, T.C.NO.9/2099 (2), SASTHAMANGALAM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND FORMERLY RESIDENT OF T.C.NO.13/576, KUNNUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.J.HARIKUMAR SRI.HARIKUMAR.S. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA (GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GP. SRI. BENNY VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J ============== W.P.(C).No. 22443 OF 2008 ==================== Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T Even though the learned Government Pleader, who took notice for the respondents, sought for time to get instructions, in the nature of the decision which is being taken, I am not inclined to grant time. The grievance of the petitioner is that her address has been shown wrongly in Ext.P1 award notice under Section 12 (2), regarding acquisition of 24 Sqm. of land belonging to her and situated in Peroorkada Village in Thiruvananthapuram Taluk. The name and address of the awardee shown in Ext.P1 is as follows: “Deepa, W/o. Binil Roy, Chennasseri Veedu, Kowdiyar” According to the petitioner, she never had anything to do with Chennasseri Veedu on Kowdiar. She was previously residing at T.C.No.13/576, Kunnukuzhy, Thiruvananthapuram and presently is residing at T.C.No.9/2099 (2), Sasthamangalam PO., Thiruvananthapuram. Because of the wrong address in Ext.P1, Ext.P1 was not served on her. However, she came to know that her properties were also proposed for acquiring from her neighbours, whose properties were under acquisition. She W.P.(C).No. 22443 OF 2008 2 submitted Ext.P4 on 29.6.2008. Petitioner asserts that Ext.P4 has been filed within the statutory period. Ext.P4 contains two requests. The first request is to make a reference regarding the correct compensation for her properties and the second request is that her name and address in the award and the reference be corrected as stated in Ext.P4. I do not propose to go into the merits of the petitioner's claim that Ext.P4 has been filed within the statutory period. However, considering the merit noticed by me in the petitioner's contention that the address shown in Ext.P1 is not the correct address, I dispose of the writ petition in the following terms. The 2nd respondent will take up Ext.P4 immediately, issue hearing notice to the petitioner, hear the petitioner and then take a correct decision on Ext.P4, as early as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE bkn/-