IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2009 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 15908 of 2006(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. M.MANI, S/O.MADHVAN PILLAI, MEENA BHAVAN, KUNNUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. L.KRISHNAMMA, W/O.M.MANI, MEENA BHAVAN, KUNNUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. MR.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR *(LAND ACQUISITION) COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 23. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.TEKCHAND FOR R1 TO 3 ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.2892/2009 IN WPC. 15908/2006 DISMISSED 24/03/2009 SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE GO(RT) 5386/95/LAD DT. 20.9.95 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P2:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE SISUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE TRIVANDRUM DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DT. 6.12.96. P3:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA KAUMUDI DAILY DT. 21.5.96. P4:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. NO.13034/96 DT. 29.2.00 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P5;- COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DT. 19.9.02 ISSUED BY THE TRIVANDRUM CORPORATION TO THE PETITIONER. P6:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. 10441/04 DT. 6.4.04 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P7:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DT. 12.1.04 PUBLISHED BY THE RESPONDENTS. P8:- COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE DT. 6.1.03 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE TRIVANDRUM CORPORATION. P9:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF APPLICATION TO OPEN A VAZHIYORAM UNIT DT. 27.6.05 FROM THE DEPT. OF TOURISM, GOVT. OF KERALA. P10:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 10.5.05 SUBMTITED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DY.COLLECTOR (LA.) P11:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 10.5.05 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORATION. P12:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. DT. 27.10.05 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC. 29636/05. P13:- COPY OF THE ORDER GO(MS) NO.25/06/TFVM. DT. 2.5.06. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(1):- GO(MS 102/08 IND (E) DEPT. DT. 11.3.68. R1(2):- NOTIFICATION GO(MS) NO.167/97/ID DT. 13.11.97. R1(3):- GO(MS) NOTIFICATION NO.32010/L2/I3/ID DT. 22ND JUNE 95. R3(a):- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 24.9.03 AND LETTER NO.ES4/19505/92 DT. 16.12.03. W.P.(C) NO.15908/2006 R3(b):- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 8.7.04 IN OP. 2954/99. R3(c):- COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.350/04/TRAN. DT. 29.9.04. R3(d):- COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.353/04/REV. DT. 26.11.04. R3(e):- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.2673 DT. 20.12.04. R3(f):- COPY OF THE SEKTCH SHOWING ACQUIRED LAND AND THE LAND TO BE ACQUIRED. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE TSS HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. --------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.15908 OF 2006 ---------------------------- DATED THIS THE 24 DAY OF MARCH, 2009 JUDGMENT Ext.P7 notification and Ext.P13 order are under challenge. Petitioners are title holders of 1acre 57 cents of land in Pettah village. Approximately 2.37.23 hectares of land is proposed to be acquired for the purpose of a Bus Terminal in Thruvananthapuram City including 63.10 Ares of land belonging to the petitioners. In respect of the entire extent except 63.10 Ares, all the formalities are completed, award passed and the matter is pending consideration before the reference court for enhancement of compensation. 2. Proposal for acquisition was originally initiated on 20/3/92. But in the year 1994 since the proceedings are discontinued, the proposal was dropped. Again the Government by order dated 20/6/1995 initiated proceedings for acquisition invoking the urgency clause and the Board of Revenue accorded -2- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 sanction on 19/1/1996. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the Kerala Gazette dated 11/6/1996 and in two Malayalam Daily newspapers during May 1996 and November, 1996. The acquisition proceedings were continued and the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published in the Gazette on 26/11/1996 and in two Malayalam daily newspapers. The proceeding was again discontinued for want of funds for payment of compensation. Thus, the acquisition initiated in 1996 for the second time also ended in cancellation during 1999. 3. Since the purpose for which the acquisition was initiated is a long pending need of the public, the K.S.R.T.C. again requested the Government to initiate the land acquisition proceedings for the third time. Formation of a Bus Terminal in Thiruvananthapuram City for the long distance buses is a public need and therefore the authorities cannot drop the proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act to acquire the lands which are -3- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 identified and found suitable for the establishment of a Bus Terminal. Pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1), which is produced as Ext.R3(e), in respect of the properties other than the properties belonging to the petitioners, award has been passed and property was taken over and handed over to the K.S.R.T.C. Compensation was also paid as per the award. The establishment of Bus Terminal in the acquired property is again delayed due to pendency of this writ petition and the interim orders passed by this Court. Therefore, the acquisition proceedings in respect of the remaining area of 63.10 Ares of land belonging to the petitioners remain incomplete. 4. The petitioners property was also included in 1993 acquisition, 1996 acquisition and in the present acquisition. Petitioners prepared plans to utilise their property and in furtherence thereto they have applied for building permit and plan. When the Corporation refused to issue necessary building permit and plan, petitioners have approached this Court and this -4- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 Court by Ext.P4 judgment dated 29/2/2000 recorded the submission of the Government Pleader that the K.S.R.T.C. has informed the District Collector that they no longer require the site for construction of a Bus Terminal and therefore the land acquisitions proceedings are dropped. When the Corporation delayed the grant of building permit and sanction for construction, petitioners again approached this Court. The reason stated by the Corporation is that there is a proposal for acquisition by the K.SR.T.C. This Court observed that merely because there was once a proposal made long back, there cannot be any objection for construction of the building and directed the Corporation to grant the building permit and sanction. Pursuant to Ext.P4, the Corporation issued building permit and plan and the petitioners constructed a building intended to be used as a resort for tourists. In the meanwhile the proceedings for acquisition were initiated and continued by the K.S.R.T.C. Various contentions were raised by the learned Senior Counsel -5- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 appearing for the petitioners challenging the acquisition proceedings. It is true that the petitioners have seriously opposed the acquisition of their property and that they were put to severe hardships consequent on the series of dropping of acquisition proceedings at the whims and fancies of the respondents. The conduct of successive acquisition proceedings caused severe hardship and agony to the land owners. Once the respondnts have submitted before this Court that they have no proposal to acquire the land and further submitted that they are going to initiate proceedings for withdrawal of acquisition. The conduct of not acquiring the property and delaying the acquisition for more than a decade caused serious hardship to the petitioners. The proposal to construct the building and used it for commercial purposes was defeated by the conduct of the respondents. Their proposal to construct the building was delayed for more than a decade. 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners contended -6- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 that there is no bona fides in the acquisition proceedings initiated because the proposal to establish a Bus Terminal was of the year 1993 and that if there is any bona fides in establishing a Bus Terminal, there is no reason why they have not established it for the last 15 years. So the Counsel submitted that the proposal to acquire the land is at the instance of some third persons and there is no bona fides for the acquisition. 6. The facts and circumstances of the case leading to the initiation of acquisition, dropping the acquisition two times and initiating the acquisition again after a decade, normally lead to a conclusion that there is no bona fides in initiating the acquisition proceedings. But from the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it is seen that the proposal for acquisition for the second time was dropped due to want of funds. Belatedly, they have again initiated acquisition proceedings, which were taken up seriously and completed, award passed and compensation paid. The said conduct leads to the conclusion that the -7- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 acquisition is for public purpose. Therefore, I cannot agree with the reasons stated by the petitioners that the acquisition proceedings are liable to be quashed. 7. The petitioners bona fide believing that there may not be any acquisition, they had approached the Corporation to issue permit and plan and ultimately they had constructed a building. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that if the acquisition proceedings are not quashed, the petitioners may be allowed to enjoy the building and the surrounding space necessary for enjoyment of the building. The total extent of property belonging to the petitioners is 1 acre 57 cents. 8. The K.S.R.T.C. Authorities shall consider the request for exemption. If the petitioners submit a request for exemption of a portion of the land, wherein the building situates, the Requisitioning Authority and the Land Acquisition Officer shall conduct a joint inspection and if they find any reason to exempt a portion of the land, they are free to pass appropriate orders -8- W.P.(C).No.15908/2006 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the authorities find that exemption of any portion of land and building will defeat the purpose of acquisition, the authorities need not exempt any portion of the property, but shall proceed to fix compensation for the property under acquisition and make payment at the earliest. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. kcv.