IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 1ST ASWINA 1930 W.A.No. 1865 of 2008 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.1376/2008 DATED 24/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- T.G. RADHAKRISHNAN, R.K. HOUSE, NELLAD, ERAVIPEROOR MURI, ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECOTR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT, MUVATTUPUZHA. 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA & NH), RANNI. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 1865 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 23rd day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. This writ appeal is directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.1376 of 2008 dated 24th June, 2008. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has refused to grant the reliefs sought for by the petitioner in the writ petition. (2) Lands of the petitioner are acquired by the respondents by issuing notifications under Sections 4(1) and 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act ('the Act' for short). The Land Acquisition Officer has passed an award. The amount that was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer was accepted by the appellant under protest. However, he has not chosen to file any application before the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter for adjudication by the civil court for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. (3) In the writ petition, the one and the only relief that was sought for by the petitioner is to direct the respondents to refer the application said to have been filed by the petitioner for adjudication by the civil court. W.A.No.1865 of 2008 2 (4) The learned Single Judge after carefully going through the records maintained by the respondents was of the opinion that the petitioner has not filed any application under Section 18 of the Act. In the absence of such an application, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. In our opinion, the reasoning and conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge cannot be faulted by us. If there is any application, then only a mandamus can be issued to the respondents to refer that application for adjudication by the civil court. In the absence of such an application, no relief can be granted. (5) In view of the above, we do not see any error in the orders passed by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, interference with the said order is not called for. Accordingly, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE vns