IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 28208 of 2007(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ JOSE K.VARKEY, S/O.LUKA VARKEY, DE NOVA GARDEN, T.C.14/473 (3), N.R.A - 55, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033. BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JAYA MANSION, VAZHUTHACAUD, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF ENGINEER. 4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, (L.A), COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT, RE-SURVEY OFFICE, PULIMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.R6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRIVANDRUM ( ADDL. R6 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 5.11.2007) BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL, SC., TRIDA FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LATHA THANKAPPAN ( R1,R3 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO. 28208/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS; EXT.P1: COPY OF SALE DEED BEARING NO.1759/97 OF SRO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.0612452 DATED 4/7/2007 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VANCHIYOOR. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 7/9/2004 BEARING NO.A1-1435/2003 PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE (EXTRA ORDINARY). EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICCE OF AWARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIOENR UNDER SECTION 12 (2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACAT 1894 DATED 25/3/2006 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REFERENCE UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE L.A. ACT. EXT.P7: COPY OF SITE PLAN SHOWING THE BOUNDARY STONES PREPARED BY INTEGRAL SOLUTIONS DATED 25/6/2007. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 27/6/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND OTHERS. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 3/7/2007 SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS; ANNEXURE (A): COPY OF THE SURVEY SKETCH OF FIELD NO.2972/6. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.28208 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner who owns 6 cents of land, portion of which has been acquired for the purpose of widening of Museum- Bakery Junction-Thampanoor-Over Bridge Road is that more than the area which is necessary as per Ext.P4 approved alignment has been taken over from the possession of the petitioner. According to him, as per Ext.P4 it is necessary to maintain only a width of 11 meters of the proposed widened road but when it comes to the area in front of the petitioners property width of the road is seen increased to 12.50 meters. Noticing the controversy, this court on 05/11/2007 passed the following interim order: “ The District Collector, Trivandrum is suo motu impleaded as the additional 6th respondent. Petitioner submits that he had not received any notice of the joint inspection of the site. There will be a direction to the additional 6th respondent and the Secretary,TRIDA to conduct the joint WPC.No.28208/07 2 inspection within three weeks from today with the assistance of the Superintendent, Survey Land Records, with notice to the petitioner and submit a plan with a statement. It is made clear that the joint inspection shall be supervised either by the Secretary TRIDA and also the Collector himself or by the senior officers and that shall not be delegated to surveyors etc. Office is directed to communicate copy of the order to the additional 6th respondent and Superintendent, Survey Land Records, Trivandrum.” 2. Pursuant to that, an inspection and measurement was conducted and on 28/11/2007 , the Secretary, TRIDA has filed a statement. It is claimed in the statement that pursuant to the interim order, inspection was conducted on 22/11/2007 in the presence of the petitioner and that on verification and inspection in the site it is clearly seen that survey stones planted in the ground is in compliance with the alignment and approved sketch in respect of Sy.No.2972 of Vanchiyoor village (Ext.P4). It is stated that actual extent of property which was actually taken possession comes to 00.35 Ares and that it is stated that WPC.No.28208/07 3 the land taken possession was handed over peacefully by the petitioner to the land acquisition authority and that the land acquisition authority has put the requisitioning authority in possession of that land. The plan and sketch also has been produced along with the report. 3. Heard the submissions of Sri.V.P.K.Panicker, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.K.A.Jaleel, standing counsel for TRIDA and also Smt.Latha Thankappan, learned Government Pleader. Though Sri.Panicker has addressed very strenuous submissions before me drawing my attention to the rival pleadings and also to the documents placed on record, I am of the view having regard to the contours of this court's jurisdiction for judicial review of land acquisition matters, it is difficult to grant the reliefs sought for by the petitioner which are essentially the following: “ Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to correct the field sketch No.2972/6 and connected records with them and make it in conformity with the alignment sketch marked as Exhibit P4, as regards the petitioners property. Issue a writ in the mandamus or any other WPC.No.28208/07 4 appropriate writ order or direction compelling the respondents to withdraw/correct the Land Acquisition proceedings pertaining to the petitioner's property in LAC.No.52/2005, and to acquire only so much of the petitioners property as is necessary to widen the Museum-Bakery Junction-Thampanoor-Overbridge Road, as shown in Exhibit P4 plan.” It is trite that once award has been passed and possession has been taken, the court should be very slow in interfering with land acquisition matters. It is submitted by Sri.Jaleel that what has been taken over is only the property covered by the award and in the sketch which is produced along with the report dated 28/11/2007 and there won't be any endeavour to dispossess the petitioner of any more properties. I record the above submission. Writ petition is disposed of declining the reliefs sought for. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.28208/07 5