IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 5839 of 2008(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KURIAKOSE, S/O.ANTONY, AGED 48 YEARS, THAYIL HOUSE, CHITHIRAPURAM P.O. POWER HOUSE,ADIMALY. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PAINAVU, IDUKKI. 3. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THRISSUR. 4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. STATION, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BASANT BALAJI FOR R1 & 2 P.P.THAJUDEEN, S.C. FOR R3 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX(WPC 5839/08) PETITIONER'S EXTS.: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA NO.215 DATED 17.10.79 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH ATTACHED TO PATTA NO.215 DATED 17.10.79. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 27.1.06 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLIVASAL VILLAGE. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER SHOWING THE ALIGNMENT OF THE PIPELINE. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 13.10.06 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE WIFE OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.2.2008. EXT.P7(PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE REPLY AFFIDAVIT): TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE PURCHASE COMMITTEE MEETING. RESPONDENTS EXTS.(2ND RESPONDENT): EXT.R2(a): TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE LOCATION. RESPONDENTS EXTS. (THIRD RESPONDENT): EXT.R3(a): SKETCH SHOWING THE ALIGNMENT. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.5839 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 11th June, 2008 JUDGMENT Mr.Alexander Joseph, learned counsel for the petitioner has addressed me very strenuously. Learned counsel submitted that the original proposal was to acquire the entire extent of 83.250 cents and the building belonging to the petitioner. But that proposal has been changed and the present proposal is to acquire only 32 cents. If the 32 cents is taken and the penstock pipe is going to be laid in front of the petitioner's building, life in the building which remains unacquired will become impossible. I feel that there is an element of genuineness in the apprehensions of the petitioner. However, I do not find way to grant relief No.1 which is a direction to the respondents to acquire the entire extent of 83.250 cents of land. The acquisition proceedings were initiated at the instance of the K.S.E.B. who have requested the Government to acquire only 32 cents. It is for the requisitioning authority concerned, i.e. the K.S.E.B., to decide as to how much land is required for their purpose. The second prayer in the Writ Petition is that a direction to the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.31,000/- for registered land and Rs.16,500/- for unregistered land. It was submitted by the W.P.C.No.5839/08 - 2 - Government Pleader and the Standing Counsel for the K.S.E.B. that if the petitioner is ready for a negotiated purchase and sale of the property actually required by the respondent, they are ready to pay the rates demanded by the petitioner as per that prayer. Learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to get instructions from his client regarding this offer from the respondents. On instructions he submits that the petitioner is not agreeable. This prayer therefore cannot be granted. The third prayer in the Writ Petition is that a direction to the respondents not to trespass to the property of the petitioner and instal pipeline through the property without acquiring the same and paying compensation in accordance with law be issued. It was submitted by the Government Pleader and the Standing Counsel for the K.S.E.B. that the petitioner will be dispossessed of portions of his properties only in due process of law, i.e. under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (if he is not agreeable for the negotiated purchase and sale). The authorities under the K.S.E.B. are entering into the petitioner's property only for the purpose of conducting survey works and the same cannot be treated as trespass. I record the above submissions of the respondents in this context and hold that it is not possible to grant relief Nos.1 and 2 in view of the stand W.P.C.No.5839/08 - 3 - that the petitioner is not ready for negotiated purchase. I dispose of the Writ Petition permitting the respondents to acquire the petitioner's property under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, if necessary by invoking emergency provisions under Section 17 of the Act and it is made clear that once award is passed under the Act, it will be open to the petitioner to seek a reference under Section 18 for determining the correct compensation. In such a reference, the petitioner will have the liberty of claiming compensation on the ground of injurious affection for his unacquired properties. There will be a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to remove the survey blocks referred to in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit filed by respondents 3 and 4 as soon as land acquisition proceedings are completed and if any injury has been caused to the petitioner on account of such survey blocks, the petitioner is given liberty to seek compensation on that ground also from the reference court. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE