IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN MONDAY, THE 22ND MARCH 2010 / 1ST CHAITHRA 1932 WA.No. 524 of 2010 -------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.4190/2010 Dated 03/03/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------ MEETHALE ABDUL MAJEED, S/O.KUNHAMMED, NEAR GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL, ETTIKULAM POST, RAMANTHALI VILLAGE, PAYYANNUR, THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, EZHIMALA NAVAL ACADEMY, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Raman, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No. 524 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT P.R.Raman, J. The appellant/petitioner aggrieved by the dismissal of W.P.(C) No.4190 of 2010 by the learned Single Judge has filed the present writ appeal. 2. The appellant invoking Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act submitted an application before the Special Tahsildar for compensation in respect of the land measuring 0.5058 hectare in R.S.No.15/1A1A (old survey No.---) of Ramanthali Village acquired for the establishment of Ezhimala Naval Academy. His request for enhancement is based on the decision in L.A.R.No.120 of 1987 of the Sub Court, Payyananur. The Special Tahsildar, by Ext.P2, did not entertain the application on the ground W.A. No.524 of 2010 - 2 - that on verification of the application filed by the appellant, it is revealed that the original survey number of the acquired property was not furnished. Thereafter, the appellant filed a review application by Ext.P4. The learned Single Judge found that in the absence of any specific provision, the review will not lie. 3. We have heard Sri.O.Ramachandran Nambiar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also the learned Government Pleader. 4. Admittedly, there is no specified forum prescribed under Rule 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. The appellant had, in fact, submitted an application showing the resurvey number. Though he has not furnished any original survey number, the application would have been returned as defective so as to enable the applicant to cure the defect and re-present the same. That has not been done. 5. In the circumstances, we feel that the appellant W.A. No.524 of 2010 - 3 - may furnish the old survey number of the acquired property within a period of ten days from today before the Special Tahsildar, whereupon the Special Tahsildar may consider Ext.P1 application and dispose of the same on merits. To the limited extent of enabling the appellant to furnish the old survey number and the Tahsildar to comply with the direction, Ext.P2 is quashed. Writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.R.Raman, Judge vns