IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 14TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26123 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. P.A.MOHAMMED, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.P.K.ABDU, PADIYATH HOUSE, DOOR NO.EL 5/840, LOKAMALLESWARAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. K.K.VENUGOPAL, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.KOLATHAPILLIL THANKAMMA, DOOR NO.EL 5/838, LOKAMALLESWARAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. P.V.TAZ, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.P.E.VELU, PALAKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, DOOR NO.12/201 A, LOKAMALLESWARAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU 'RI.JAGAN GEORGE SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD SRI.P.G.PRAMOD RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY PROJECT OFFICER, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, THUSHARA BINDU, CHANRANAGAR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, THRISSUR AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, FOR ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR KODUNGALLUR BYE PASS, THRISSUR. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD (NATIONAL HIGHWAY), KODUNGALLUR. 4. CHIEF ENGINEER, PWD (NATIONAL HIGHWAY), TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI FOR R2,3,4 SRI.THOMAS ANTONY FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,J. ------------------------ W.P.(C)No.26123 of 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of of September, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners are impugning the proposal to acquire portion of their properties for the construction of the Kodungallur bye-pass of NH-17 on various grounds. Sri.Thomas Antony the learned standing counsel for the National Highway Authorities submitted that the Kodungallur bye pass and the NH 17 is yet to be entrusted with the national highway authority. The 2nd respondent competent authority has been appointed, according to him, at the instance of the third respondent who is in charge of the NH-17 in the relevant reach of the Kodungallur bye pass. Whatever that be, I find that Ext.P6 notification has been issued under Section 3A (1) of the National Highways Act. It was open to the petitioners to file their objections to Ext.P6. I find that they have already filed Ext.P9 objection. Sri.Vaheeda Babu, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Section 3C hearing is already over, but the petitioners have not been WPC.No.26123/2008 2 informed about the result of that hearing. Under the above circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition issuing the following directions; The second respondent is directed to intimate the result of the hearing already conducted on Ext.P9 objection to the petitioners who filed Ext.P9. If the result of the hearing is against the petitioners, it is open to them to challenge the declaration under Section 3D which may be issued by the 2nd respondent on all available grounds. (PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE) dpk