IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 883 of 2008(E) ------------------------ PETITIONERS: ------------------- 1. M.K.MUHAMMED, AGED 55 YEARS,S/O KHADER THALAKOTTUMOOLAYIL THENGOTTUKARA, KAKKANADU, VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. 2. M.K.RABIA, AGED 42 YEARS,B D/O. KHADER, THALAKOTTUMOOLAYIL THENGOTTUKARA, KAKKANADU, VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.S.CHANDRASEKHARAN SMT.LEKSHMI SWAMINATHAN SMT.P.PRIYA DEVI. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. SPECIAL THASILDAR (LA) LAND ACQUISITION, THRIPUNITHARAM. ADDL.R4. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, INFO PARK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.21.1.2008 IN I.A.NO.704/2008) BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, INFOPARKS FOR ADDL.R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.883 OF 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners whose properties were acquired by negotiation for the purpose of the additional 4th respondent. Their grievance is that though their properties were eligible to be included in category-II, i.e., dry lands having access from public road with value of Rs.80,584/- per cent, going by the sale deeds Exts.P3 and P4, the properties were by mistake included in category IV, i.e. dry lands having no road access with much lesser value. Mr. V.S.Chandrasekharan, learned counsel for the petitioner would highlight the recitals in the documents by which the petitioners obtained title to the properties and would try to convince me that mistakes had actually crept into Exts.P3 and P4. There seems to be some merit in what he submits. But having regard to the contours of this Court's powers under Article 226, I am of the view that the petitioners should go before a competent Civil Court for the redressal of their grievances. I dispose of this writ petition without granting the prayers, however, W.P.(C)No.883/2008 2 leaving open the petitioners' remedy before a competent Civil Court. It is made clear that this judgment does not pronounce on the merit of the petitioners' claim. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) ps