IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24102 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ MR.MOHAN KUMAR, MANNIKKATH HOUSE, GURUVAYOOR,THRISSUR-680101. BY ADV. SMT.K.LATHA RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE GURUVAYUR DEWASWOM COMMISSIONER, GURUVAYUR DEWASWOM, GURUVAYUR-1., 2. THE CHAIRMAN, GURUVAYUR DEWASWOM MANAING COMMITTEE, GURUVAYUR-1. 3. ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEWASWOM,GURUVAYUR -1. 4. THE GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, GURUVAYUR-1., REP BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) GURUVAYUR DEVASWAM, GURUVAYUR. 6. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, AYYATHOLE, THRISSUR-1. 7. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, CULTURAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. R1 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON R6 TO R8 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.R.LAKSHM9I NARAYAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSI0N ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING VK THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.24102 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. Petitioner's lands were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act for public purpose, to wit, need of the Guruvayoor Devaswom to have further land for the purpose of a CBSE school under one of its trusts. The plea of the petitioner now is against the acquisition proceedings on the premise that in the acquisition, while he is being given land value only at the 1999 rate, the beneficiaries of Ext.P8 review petition order are likely to get the market price at the point of time of dispossession. As of now, the acquisition is completed and award has been passed. Obviously therefore, the acquisition cannot be challenged. At the request of the petitioner, a reference has also been made to the court. This means all matters relating to the claim for enhancement of compensation have to be agitated before that court. The petitioner further WPC.24102/10 2 point out that dissatisfied by Ext.P8, the beneficiaries therein had taken up the matter to the Apex Court and Ext.P16 order of the Apex Court contains a direction that the case of the petitioners therein be considered by a committee. That direction was made by the Apex court on the submission by the writ petitioners therein that the Guruvayoor Devaswom has constituted a committee to look into the grievances of the land owners whose lands have been acquired. If the petitioner is entitled to have his claim looked into again by that committee and if he has made appropriate application for such purpose or if any application by him is likely to be considered by that committee, that could be done in accordance with law. However, the petitioner having appropriate remedy by prosecuting the land acquisition reference stated to have been also made, we do not find any ground to entertain this writ petition and grant any relief, it having been found that a writ petition against an acquisition proceedings will not lie after issuance of the award. It is clarified that the claim of the petitioner, if any, that he is also entitled to the benefits, if any, of the direction of the Apex WPC.24102/10 3 Court is a matter which he may urge before the reference court to be decided in accordance with law. We leave open the contentions of the Guruvayoor Devaswom, the petitioner and the State in the LAR. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, Judge. kkb.4/12.