IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2011 / 26TH ASWINA 1933 WA.No. 1467 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.18075/2011 Dated 21/07/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------------- JOSEPH, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.CHACKO, VATTAPRAMBIL HOUSE, VADAKKUM MURI P.O., KARIMKUNNAM, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.A.S.SAJUSH PAUL SRI.THOMAS JAMES MUNDACKAL SRI.E.A.BIJUMON SMT.S.AMBILY RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, PAINAVU, IDUKKI, PIN – 685 503. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION BUILDING, THODUPUZHA, PIN-585 584. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, PAINAVU, IDUKKI – 685 603. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag. CJ. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1467 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, Ag.CJ. The appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge declining to issue the direction sought for by the appellant to the respondents, i.e., to consider his representation for award of compensation for the land surrendered by him free of cost for construction of bye-pass road. 2. Admittedly, the appellant surrendered 22 cents of land free of cost for construction of bye-pass road. After ten years, the appellant has approached the authorities contending that he is entitled to compensation because some others, whose land was taken over for construction of the very same bye-pass road, were paid compensation. The learned Single Judge rejected the claim on the ground of delay alone. Before us counsel for the appellant submitted that since others are given compensation, the appellant also should be WA.1467/11 2 given compensation. What we notice is that the appellant was employed abroad and some part of his land was not included in the acquisition. When a portion of the land is surrendered free of cost for construction of bye-pass road, the appellant's remaining portion of the property gets substantial value increase because of road facility. We do not think that the appellant can demand compensation after surrendering the land free of cost for construction of bye-pass road, after ten years. We see no merit in the Writ Appeal. The Writ Appeal is dismissed accordingly. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE vgs