IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 9918 of 2011(L) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.P.VARGHESE, S/O.V.PAPPACHAN, T.C.NO.26/664 CHEMPAKA NAGAR-141, VAN ROSE JUNCTION, NEAR BAKERY JUNCTION, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN SMT.M.A.ZOHRA SRI.R.S.MADHU SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. TRIDA (TRIVANDRUM DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRIDA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 3. RICHARD FLETCHER, VELLATHUVILAKOM BUNGLOW, PATHIRIKURI MURI, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 4. JAMES FLETCHER, VELLATHUVILAKOM BUNGLOW, PATHIRIKURI MURI, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 5. JANAK FLETCHER, VELLATHUVILAKOM BUNGLOW, PATHIRIKURI MURI, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. svs ..................2/-... ...2... WPC. NO.9918/2011 6. VILASINI FLETCHER, VELLATHUVILAKOM BUNGLOW, PATHIRIKURI MURI, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 7. KUMUDINI FLETCHER, VELLATHUVILAKOM BUNGLOW, PATHIRIKURI MURI, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 035. 8. M/S.NIKUNJAM CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.KRISHNAKUMAR, PIN-695 035. R1 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL, SC., TRIDA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO.9918/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 14/02/2011. P2: COPY OF REPRESENTED SUBMITTED BDY THE PETITIONER ON 14/03/201. P3: COPY OF ORDER NO.G.O.(Rt)MP/3621/2010 SGD.DATED 19/11/2010. P4: PLAINT IN THE SAID SUIT, O.S.225 OF 2006 FILED BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P5: COPY OF THE DEMAND SLIP FOR ADVANCE COLLECTION OF REVENUE LICENCE FEES (P F A LICENCE) FROM THE PETITIONER FOR HOTEL THRIVENI OF DOOR NO.14/1952. P6: COPY OF DEMAND SLIP - D & O LICENCE ALSO FROM THE PETITIONER FOR HOTEL THRIVENI DATED 28/01/2011. P7: COPY OF THE RECEIPT OBTAINED AS PAYMENT OF THE EXT.P5. P8: COPY OF THE RECEIPT OBTAINED AS PAYMENT OF THE EXT.P6. P9: COPY OF THE ELECTRICITY BILL DATED 25/01/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R2(a):COPY OF THE DECISION IN THE MEETING HELD ON 30/05/2009 BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF TRIDA. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No . 9918 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 14th June , 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers : i. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, cancelling the illegal sanction accorded vide Ext. P3 and to quash the same as against Article 300 A of the Constitution of India and the principles of natural justice. ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to proceed with acquisition if essential for public purpose, in accordance with the Land Acquisition Act and Rules therein, affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and others who are in possession and enjoyment of the property continuously and since 1948, and for the last more than 6 dacades; iii. to call for the records pertaining to the illegal proposition for public private partnership (PPP) entered into as a joint venture by the 2nd respondent with others like respondents 3 to 8 herein who have concocted fresh documents to snatch the precious property of people like the petitioner; iv. to direct the 1st petitioner to acquire the property if needed for a public purpose as per land acquisition proceedings v. to issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction as deemed fit to be granted in the circumstances of the above case; and vi. to grant costs of the proceedings. W.P. (C) No. 9918 of 2011 : 2 : 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in occupation of the concerned premises for more than six decades, running a hotel therein and the petitioner is not liable to be vacated all of a sudden by the respondents, who allegedly are acting hand - in - glove with each other, in connection with the proposed setting up of Public Private Partnership for construction of an integrated commercial building complex. 3. The second respondent has filed a statement pointing out that the idea and understanding of the petitioner is quite wrong and misconceived, at the same time, explaining the scope of the project which is mooted by the land owners and the builders. It is stated in paragraph 4 of the said statement that the intention of the said respondent is only to implement the DTP Scheme and requisition for the proposed acquisition has already been forwarded to the District Collector, Trivandrum. While disputing the averments and allegations in the writ petition, it is stated that, there is no malafide intention on the part of the second respondent in implementing the Scheme. It is also asserted that there is no violation of the principles of natural justice and the proceedings taken are only at the embrionic stage and that the land W.P. (C) No. 9918 of 2011 : 3 : will be acquired only in accordance with the relevant provisions of law and with the sanction of the Government. 4. In the above circumstances, the apprehension of the petitioner expressed in the writ petition is rather premature and no interference is warranted in this writ petition for the time being. Accordingly, the same is closed, making it clear that, if at all, any steps are to be pursued in respect of the property in question, the same shall only be in tune with the relevant provisions of law and of course, after giving a prior notice to the petitioner. Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd /True copy/ P.A. To Judge