IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10617 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): 1 ---------------- PRABHAVATHY AMMA, D/O.BHAVANI AMMA, AGED 65 YEARS,SREERANGAM VEEDU, KUMARI MANDIRAM, NEERAVIL, KUREEPUZHA, THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.SATISH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A) NATONAL HIGHWAY, KOLLAM-12. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10617 of 2009 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD NOTICE UNDER SECTION 12(2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT. EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE REFERENCE APPLICATION DATED 19.4.99 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT FOR SENDING EXT.P2 EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED 21.4.99 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 19.1.09 EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 12.2.09 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................... W.P.(C).10617/2009 ....................... Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The prayer in the writ petition is to direct respondents to refer Ext.P2 Reference Application to the Additional Sub Court, Kollam, as provided under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short 'the Act'). Petitioner states that 45.20 cents of property in R.S.No.199/5 of Thrikkadavoor Village owned by the petitioner was acquired by the respondents. 4(1) notification was issued on 14.12.1995 and going by the admitted facts, notice under Section 12(2) of the Act was despatched to the petitioner on 10.3.1999. Petitioner submitted Ext.P2 Reference Application which was received by the respondents on 21.4.1999 is also the admitted fact. There was no response and finally in reply to Ext.P5 application made by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, she was informed by Ext.P6 that the Reference Application was rejected on 1.3.2002 for the reason that it was not submitted within the time limit. It is challenging Ext.P6 and for a reference, the writ petition is filed. W.P.(C).10617/09 2 2. Admittedly notice was despatched on 10.3.1999 which was served on the petitioner on 11.3.1999. If the period specified under Section 18 of the Act is counted from 11.3.1999 Reference Application having been received by the 2nd respondent on 21.4.1999 is within six weeks and if so, rejection of Ext.P2 application on the ground that the same was belated is incorrect. 3. For that reasons stated above, rejection of Ext.P2 calls for interference and is set aside. 2nd respondent is directed to refer Ext.P2 application made by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Act to the Reference Court in accordance with law. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible at any rate within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs