IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2872 of 2011(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. T.C.POULOSE,THURUTHUMMEL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO,ERNAKULAM 683 562. 2. THAMPI.V.K,VALAYIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO,ERNAKULAM 683 562. 3. K.M.SUNIL KUMAR,KAVALAKKAMPARAMBIL HOUSE KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO,ERNAKULAM 683 562. 4. K.A.MADHAVAN,KAVALAKKAMPARAMBIL HOUSE KIZHAKKAMBALAM PO,ERNAKULAM 683 562. BY ADV. SRI.VIJU ABRAHAM SRI.DINNY THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,PWD(ROADS AND BRIDGES)GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,PWD(ROADS AND BRIDGES),MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 686 661. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO.2899/11, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NOs. 2872 & 2899 OF 2011 ======================== Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T In these writ petitions, petitioners are aggrieved by the alignment fixed for the proposed highway from Kakkanad to Kothamangalam via Kizhakkambalam. Petitioners in WP(C) No. 2872/11 claim to have submitted Exts.P2, P4 and P5 representations and the petitioners in WP(C) No. 2899/11 have filed Exts.P2 and P7 representations objecting to the proposed alignment and seeking its shifting to another alignment, which according to the petitioners will be less injurious to the land owners. In these writ petitions, they seek a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the aforesaid representations with notice to them. 2. In my view, this request of the petitioners is not supported by any statutory provision and no statute recognises any right for a land owner to make any representation at this stage objecting to the proposed alignment and seeking its shifting. The affected land owner will have a right to raise his objections only after proceedings are initiated under the Land WPC Nos. 2872 & 2899/11 :2 : Acquisition Act or the National Highways Act. Therefore, the representations do not have any statutory support, and therefore, this Court will not be justified in directing its consideration. I am not inclined to issue the order as sought for. Writ petitions are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp