IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13989 of 2008(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.K.RAVEENDRAN, S/O. KRISHNAN KUTTY, AGED 61 YEARS, R/AT KALAPURAKKAL, PERUVANNAMUZHI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. N.RAJENDRAN NAIR, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, AGED 57 YEARS, R/AT SAPHALYA, PERUVANNAMUZHI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. O.K.KARUNAKARAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, AGED 66 YEARS, R/AT ORAVUNDAN CHALIL, PERUVANNAMUZHI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. K.M.KELAPPAN, S/O. KANNAN, AGED 70 YEARS, R/AT KULANGARAMEETHAL, PERUVANNAMUZHI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. AMBILI MANOJ, D/O. KUTTAPPAN NAIR, AGED 23 YEARS, R/AT RADHALAYAM,PERUVANNAMUZHI PO., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 6. K.O.ANNAMMA, D/O. AUGUSTY, AGED 65 YRS, R/AT AANATHANATH, PERUVANNAMUZHI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 7. O.K.SUDHAKARAN, S/O. KARUNAKARAN, AGED 37 YEARS, R/AT ORAVUNDAN CHALIL, PERUVANNAMUZHI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. KERALA STATE WATER AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, JALA BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WP(C).No. 13989 of 2008 3. PROJECT DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JBIC ASSISTED KOZHIKODE WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, MALAPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KOZHIKODE. 5. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOZHIKODE. ADV. MR.BABU VARGHESE, SC, KWA FOR R2 & 3 MR. V. MANU - GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13989 of 2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT.25.1.2008 BY THE ACTION COMMITTEE BEFORE DISTRICT COLLECTOR EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER DT.26/2/2008 BY THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOZHIKODE. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 25.1.2008 BY THE CTION COMMITTEE BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE LIST DT 29.3.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LIST DT. 9.4.08 SUBMITTED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD, KOZHIKODE. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER DT 29/3/2008 BY THE RDO TO THE TAHSILDAR. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE LETTER DT.2/4/2008 BY THE TAHSILDAR. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE REQUEST DT 21/4/008 BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT 8/09/2008 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.16/09/2008 ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a): COPYT OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD 18.9.2008 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R2(b): COPY OF THE REPORT ON STATUS AS ON 17.03.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT PROJECT DIRECTOR. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.13989 OF 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The Water Authority conducted blasting operations using explosives in the property of the petitioners in Chakkittapara village in Kozhikode District causing damages and the petitioners have not been given appropriate compensation for the damages caused, is the grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition. Although it is contended that the blasting operation was in the property acquired, the eligibility of the petitioners for compensation is not disputed. The only dispute is regarding the quantum thereof. According to the petitioners, the quantum has not been assessed taking into account the parameters applicable for assessment of such compensation. The petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “(i) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the respondents to pay the re-fixed compensation before starting the blasting operation. (ii) an order of stay of blasting operation permitted as per Ext.P2 till payment of compensation re-fixed and due to the petitioners” W.P.(c)No.13989/08 2 2. Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the first respondent and respondents 2 and 3. Earlier, the matter was heard on 19/5/2010 and I directed the Government Pleader to see that the files relating to the manner of assessment of compensation due to the petitioners containing reasons as to how they have taken into account the various parameters for fixing the compensation is produced before this court. The learned Government Pleader could not satisfy me that the file discloses a consideration of the parameters applicable for such assessment of compensation. Therefore I am of opinion that the respondents are liable to be directed to reconsider the question of quantum of compensation. Accordingly, there would be a direction to the respondents to see that the committee consisting of respondents 3 to 5 reconsiders the quantum of damages payable to the petitioners taking into account all the parameters applicable for such assessment as is usually done for assessing damages in similar matters and pass a fresh order after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. The order to be passed shall contain on the face of it the basis of the calculation of compensation taking into W.P.(c)No.13989/08 3 account all parameters applicable for the same. Orders shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.13989/08 4