IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9729 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.LAKSHMIKUTTY, PUTHOOR PUTHEN VEEDU, PURUMBUZHA P.O., KOLLAM. 2. SOMARAJAN, S/O.KOCHAPPY, KATTUVARI MUKALIL KIZHAKKATHIL VEEDU, PERUMBUZHA P.O., KOLLAM. 3. SARASWATHY, PANAVILA VADAKKATHIL VEEDU, KOTTAMKARA, KOLLAM. 4. AHAMMAD KUNJU, CHERUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, THRIPPALAZHIKAM MURI, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SANTHOSH KUMAR SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), LA (NO) II, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM. MS.K.R.DEEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.9729 of 2010 (M) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioners, their properties were acquired for the purpose of Kallada Irrigation project. Subsequently, they made applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act claiming redetermination of the compensation. It is stated that pursuant to Exts.P1 to P4 notices, they were heard by the 3rd respondent on 18/12/2009. However, the complaint is that despite the hearing, orders have not been passed on the applications filed under Section 28A of the Act. It is with this grievance, this writ petition has been filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioners, they have filed applications under Section 28A of the Act, and they were heard, there is no reason why the 3rd respondent should delay orders on the applications. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing that the 3rd respondent shall, if no orders have been already passed, pass WP(C) No.9729/2010 -2- orders on the applications mentioned in Exts.P1 to P4 in accordance with law, and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg