IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 10310 of 2006(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KHILAN JUMA ATH MASJID, CHITHARI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, C.B.MOHAMMED, S/O.KUNHAMOO, CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NOBLE MATHEW RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KASARAGOD. 2. THE LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER AND SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, KASARAGOD. 3. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT, KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, REGIONAL OFFICE,. CONVENT ROAD, KOZHIKODE 673 032. 4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WAKF BOARD, ERNAKULAM, NORTH. R1-R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LATHA THANKAPPAN BY ADV. SRI.P.A.ABDUL JABBAR, SC, WAKF BOARD FOR R4 SRI.M.M.SAIDU MUHAMMED,SC,WAKF BOARD FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX(WPC 10310/06) PETITIONER'S EXTS.: EXT.P1: PHOTO COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.1810/36 OF THE HOSDURG SRO. EXT.P2: PHOTO COPY OF THE TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1 IN MALAYALAM. EXT.P3: PHOTO COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.1976/66 OF HOSDURG SRO. EXT.P4: PH0TO COPY OF PLAN OF THE PROPERTIES OWNED BY PETITIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE SITE PLAN. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHITHARI DATED 5.4.05. EXT.P7: PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 5.2.05 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER RULE 1 OF L.A.ACT. EXT.P8: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SEC.9(3) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT DATED 21.11.05 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15.12.05. EXT.P10: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 15.12.05 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 30.12.2005. EXT.P11: PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 15.2.2006. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE PRODUCED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P13: PHOTO COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14.3.06 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 22.3.06. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.10310 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 29th May, 2008 JUDGMENT The grievance which the petitioner has voiced is that the respondents are attempting to dispossess them of 0.002323 hectares of land in R.S.No.11/15 of Chithari village belonging to them without recourse to proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. According to the petitioner, initially the proposal was to acquire the above property as well as another item in R.S.No.11/8 extending to 0.0018 (later corrected as 0.0020 hectares, says the petitioner) under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioner alleges that subsequently the respondents took the stand that the property in R.S.No.11/15 was Government puramboke which could be resumed even without recourse to land acquisition proceedings. The contention of the petitioner is that the property in R.S.Nos.11/8 and 11/15 forms part and parcel of a single holding of the petitioner and forms part of a cemetery. The petitioner moved the District Collector by filing Ext.P9 representation. But the District Collector would reject Ext.P9 by Ext.P13 stating that on verification of the records it is revealed that the land in R.S.No.11/15 of Chithari Village is puramboke land and that the petitioner does not have any document to prove his title W.P.C.No.10310/06 - 2 - over that land. 2. May be it is true that going by the revenue records the land in R.S.No.11/15 is puramboke. But the District Collector does not state in Ext.P13 that the claim of the petitioner that it forms part and parcel of the cemetery under the petitioner's physical control is incorrect. What is stated is only that the land is puramboke. The circumstance that initially the proposal was to acquire the property will show that physical possession over the property is with the petitioner. The petitioner has an alternate case that even if the petitioner is not the registered title holder, the petitioner is having possessory title over the property since it forms part and parcel of a single holding. The petitioner relies on Ext.P6 possession certificate issued by the Village Officer in this regard. 3. According to me, even if it is ultimately found that the petitioner's claim of having title over the property in R.S.No.11/15 is not substantiated, then also being a person in possession the petitioner may be eligible for some compensation for the improvements effected on the same. In other words, the Government is not justified in dispossessing the petitioner completely ignoring his claims over the property in R.S.No.11/15. The question W.P.C.No.10310/06 - 3 - whether the petitioner has title over the property and the further question as to what if any is the petitioner's interest and whether the petitioner is entitled for any compensation in respect of the property in R.S.No.11/15 are all questions which should be settled by the reference court in a reference drawn up in that regard at the instance of the Land Acquisition Officer. I therefore dispose of the Writ Petition issuing the following directions/orders: Ext.P13 is quashed. The respondents are directed to initiate proceedings for acquisition of the property in R.S.No.11/15 also under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, if necessary by invoking the emergency provisions under Section 17 of the Act without tendering any compensation to the petitioner. Award should be passed determining compensation payable for the property in R.S.No.11/15 also. The land value also should be included in the compensation determined. Thereafter the entire compensation shall be deposited before the court invoking Section 31(2) of the Act. The award should be passed jointly in the names of the petitioner as well as the District Collector. The reference court (the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kasaragod) upon receiving the reference will issue notice to the petitioner as well as to the District Collector and thereafter W.P.C.No.10310/06 - 4 - dispose of that reference under Section 31(2) in accordance with law. It is open to the petitioner upon receiving notice of that award to apply for a reference under Section 18 also so that in the event of reference under Section 31(2) being decided in favour of the petitioner, he will become entitled for enhancement compensation also. Needful for complying with the above directions will be done by the concerned respondents and by the court at the earliest. The Land Acquisition Officer will initiate proceedings and pass award at the earliest and at any rate within six months of receiving copy of this judgment and the reference court will dispose of the reference under Section 31(2) within three months of its registration. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE