IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 38637 of 2010(D) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- KRISHNAKUMARI AMMA, D/O.BHAVANI AMMA, AGED 47 YEARS, NARAYANA VILASOM BUNGLOW, PERUMPUZHA CHERRY, KOTTANKARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI. K.SIJU SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM - 691 013. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA NO.II, MINI CIVIL STATION, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM - 691 501. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.38637 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 16th March, 2011 JUDGMENT An extent of 18 Ares from the property belonging to the petitioner in survey No.4779/26 of Kottankara Village was acquired for the purpose of Kallada Irrigation Project pursuant to notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short `the Act') dated 25.7.1986. Later, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the land value at Rs.6,663/-. The petitioner received the original amount with protest. At the time of receiving the amount she submitted an application for reference under section 18 of the Act. In respect of certain properties acquired under the same notification, certain persons sought for reference under section 18 of the Act and in the said reference, as per Ext.P1, the land value was enhanced. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application under section 28(A) of the Act for redetermination of the compensation based on Ext.P1. The land value was then fixed in terms of the provisions under section 28(A) and Ext.P2 award was passed. Feeling aggrieved by the non-payment of solatium and also calculation of interest as per Ext.P2 the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 with a request to the District Collector to grant the benefits in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sunder v. Union of WP(C).No.38637/2010 2 India (2001 (3) KLT 489). It is on being aggrieved by the inaction on Ext.P3 that this writ petition has been filed mainly with the prayer to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that though Ext.P3 is dated 17.8.2010 it was received by the District Collector only on 11.10.2010. Subsequently, a notice was issued to the petitioner. It is submitted, on instructions, that Ext.P3 would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law. This is recorded. In view of the said submission made on behalf of the first respondent I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P3 and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard for which a notice has already been issued. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // true copy // P.S. to Judge