IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 34573 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MICHEL SCARIA, S/O.SCARIA, AGED 53 YEARS, VAIPPANAYIL (PARANTHARAYIL), ARUNAPURAM KARA, PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SMT.A.SREEKALA RESPONDENTS: ------------- DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. * CORRECTED AS LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER DEPUTY COLLECTOR ( LAND ACQUISITION ) KOTTAYAM * Address of the respondent is corrected as per order dated 25-2-2008 in I.A.No.2627/07 BY GOVT.PLEADER SMT.LATHA THANKAPPAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.34573 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT It appears to me that there is some genuineness in the grievance voiced by the petitioner. A total extent of 8 cents of land were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioner claimed ownership over 3 cents from out of the same under Ext.P1 settlement deed. The land acquisition officer passed Ext.P3 award in favour of several persons including the petitioner and deposited the amount as revenue deposit on the reason that the title documents pertaining to the property had not been produced by any of the awardees. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application before the land acquisition officer along with the original of Ext.P1 settlement deed as well as the basic tax receipt claiming proportionate compensation due for 3 cents covered by Ext.P1 as early as on 02/11/2004. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though Ext.P4 was enquired into and parties were heard on the same on 20/07/2006, so far the respondent has not passed any orders at all on Ext.P4. WPC.No.34573/07 2 2. The learned Government Pleader would submit that the respondent has placed the matter before the Local District Government Pleader for his opinion and that for want of opinion, orders have not been passed. 3. Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar, I dispose of the writ petition issuing the following directions; The respondent will pass orders on Ext.P4 on the basis of the hearing already conducted at the earliest and at any any rate within one month of receiving copy of this judgment. Once orders are passed, the same will be communicated to the petitioner. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.34573/07 2