IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 23RD BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9094 of 2009(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. C.J.ANTONY (LEGAL HEIRS AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF LATE FR.PAUL CHAKKIATH), S/O.JOSEPH, CHAKKIATH HOUSE, KARUKUTTY, ANGAMALLY, ERNAKULAM. 2. SR.ANNESIA, REPRESENTED BY SHRI.ANTONY, -DO-. 3. JESSY, REPRESENTED BY SHRI.ANTONY, -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.VINCENT RAPHAEL SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY SRI.R.ARUN (PALLURUTHY) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM. 2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, IDAMALAYAR, IRRIGATION PROJECT, ANGAMALLY. GOVT. PLEADER K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.9.2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.9094 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 14th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T Certain properties belonging to Fr.Paul Chakkiath were acquired by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act. He is no more. The petitioners are the legal representatives of late Fr.Paul Chakkiath. The petitioners' grievance in this writ petition is that although an application under Section 18 has been filed by Fr.Paul Chakkiath, the same has not been considered and disposed of by the 2nd respondent. 2. The petitioners received the award notice on 26.8.2003. Along with R.P.No.608/2009 the petitioners have produced a copy of the application under Section 18 filed by Fr.Paul Chakkiath on 13.9.2003, copy of which was obtained by them by resort to provisions of the Right to Information Act. Receipt of the said application within the period stipulated under Section 18 is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader. Therefore, Annexure 4 application filed under Section 18 has been filed within time. It is not disputed before me that Annexure 4 application has not been disposed of yet. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 application submitted by Fr.Paul Chakkiath and Mukkanickal Antony, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.9094 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 1st day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Certain properties belonging to the petitioners have been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioners received award notice on 26.8.2003. The petitioners' grievance now is that their 3 application for reference under Section 18 has not been considered and matter referred to the court. For a valid reference under Section 18, the petitioners should have had filed an application under Section 18 within the period of limitation prescribed therein. Admittedly the petitioners received the award notice on 26.8.2003. What they have produced before this Court is Ext.P10 application as an application under Section 18. The same is dated 27.2.2009. When this was pointed out to the counsel for the petitioners, he sought time to advance further arguments on that question. Today the counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had submitted an earlier application and therefore, there is no limitation. But nowhere in the writ petition or in any of the exhibits is there even a reference of the application. Even assuming there is one the counsel is not able to tell me when the same was filed. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that the petitioners cannot now seek reference under Section 18 in so far as the application now submitted by the 1st petitioner is hopelessly barred by limitation. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 4