IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10158 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- V.A. ABRAHAM, SHAJI SADANAM, NALANCHIRA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.M.HEMALATHA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. *2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (L.A), COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM *3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.A), P.W.D., SOUTHERN CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (*ADDL. RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 5.4.2010 IN I.A. No.4936/2010) BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.10158 of 2010 (T) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of April, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that 22 sq.m. of his property comprised in survey No.133/43 of Ulloor Village was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act for widening of Kesavadasapuram-Mannanthala M.C.Road. The petitioner did not seek any reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, relying on the judgment of the Reference Court in LAR No.12/01, the petitioner submitted Ext.P1 application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act for redetermination of the compensation. His complaint is that orders have not been passed on Ext.P1. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, Ext.P1 has been filed before the Additional 3rd respondent as early as in February, 2007, and the application is otherwise proper in all respects, there is no reason why the Additional 3rd respondent should not have considered Ext.P1. WP(C) No.10158/2010 -2- Having regard to the grievance that orders have not so far been passed on Ext.P1, I dispose of this writ petition directing the Additional 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 with notice to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg