IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 1547 of 2009(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RAMANUNNI NAMBOODIRI K.R., S/O.RAMAN NAMBOODIRI, KUTTISSERI MANA, CHAMRAVATTOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. PARAMESWARAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O.VISHNU NAMBOODIRI, KUTTISSERI MANA, CHAMRAVATTOM. 3. VISHNU NAMBOODIRI V.P., S/O.VISHNU NAMBOODIRI, KUTTISSERI MANA, CHAMRAVATTOM. 4. NEELAKANTAN NAMBOODIRI K.V., S/O.VISHNU NAMBOODIRI, KUTTISSERI MANA, CHAMRAVATTOM. 5. CHAKKUPURAKKAL SARADA @ AMMU AMMA, W/O.SREEDHARAN NAMBIAR, CHAKKUPURAKKAL HOUSE, CHAMRAVATTOM. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN SRI.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A.(GENERAL), TIRUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.1547 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners' property had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. Section 12(2) notice was received by the petitioners on 12.8.2008. According to the petitioners, they submitted applications for reference under Section 18 on 22.8.2008, which were returned to the petitioners by the Land Acquisition Authority and thereafter, the petitioners again re-submitted it on 22.10.2008. However, the applications have been rejected by Ext.P3 order on the ground that the applications have been submitted beyond the period prescribed in Section 18. They are challenging Ext.P3 order. The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners had submitted applications on 22.8.2008, which were returned directing them to file representations regarding income tax deduction and after getting orders thereon to re-submit the applications for reference and therefore, the date of submission of the applications for reference under Section 18 should be taken as 22.8.2008, in which case there is no limitation. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent in which it is stated that no reference application under Section 18 was received from the petitioners at any time before 22.10.2008. It is denied in the counter affidavit that the applications have been 2 submitted by the petitioners on 22.8.2008 as claimed by them. In view of the said categoric averment, I cannot now accept the contention of the petitioners that reference applications were originally submitted on 22.8.2008, in the absence of any evidence to prove the said averment. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the challenge against the impugned order and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge