IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2009 / 24TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 13148 of 2006(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SUNNY PHILIP, EDAPPALLIL HOUSE, S.H.MOUNT P.O. KOTTAYAM, 686 006, (NOW AT NAPCO, P.B.NO.206, DEMMAM, SAUDI ARABIA). BY ADV.MR.MATHEW PHILIP. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDR, LAND ACQUISITION, (NH), CHANGANACHERRY. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (KSTP), MUVATTUPPUZHA. R1 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. V. MANU, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.13148/2006-M: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2462/04/F DTD. 23/08/2004 OF ADDL. S.R.O., KOTTAYAM. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4 (1) DTD. 06/01/2005 OF THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DTD. 14/10/2004 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OF PERUMBAIKAD. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE PANCHAYAT OFFICE, KUMARANALLOOR. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC PRINTS OF BOUNDARIES (8 NUMBERS) WITH NEGATIVES. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 22/01/2005 ISSUED TO THE R.2. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DTD. 25/01/2005 OF THE R.2. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 22/04/2005 OF THE R.2. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. 17/05/2005 SUBMITTED TO THE R.2. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 13148 OF 2006 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF JULY, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of an item of land abutting a public road. The front courtyard is adjacent to the M.C.Road. A portion of that courtyard was notified for acquisition. Petitioner challenges that. An interim order was issued on 3.7.2006, directing the authorities to decide on certain objections. Materials have been placed on record by the respondent. Additional affidavits have been placed following earlier directions. With the materials on record, it is clear that the acquisition of whole of the well would only be appropriate in public interest, having regard to the nature of the curve of the road at the point in question and it may not be feasible to accept the suggestion of the petitioner to retain the well and cover one half of the well with a slab. I find no ground to interfere with the acquisition in question in exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/15/7