Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE31T DAYOF OCTOBER20149TH KARTHIKA, 1936 WP(C).No. 27494 of 2014 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. OUSEPH THOMAS, AGED74YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, SRAMBIKKAL HOUSE, PALA.
2. S.A.THOMAS, AGED65YEARS, S/O.AVIRAH, SRAMBIKKAL HOUSE, PALA. BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN, SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN, SRI.GEORGE MATHEW, SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G, SRI.DIPU JAMES. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
2. THE SECRETARYTO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
3. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, OPPOSITE MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 050.
4. THE DIRECTOR, ROAD PROJECTS LAND ACQUISITION, RAJDHANI COMPLEX, KILLIPALAM, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 010.
5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM, CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM -686 001.
6. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, MINI CIVIL STATION, PALA -686 575.
7. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT (KSTP), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 010. WP(C).No. 27494 of 2014 (J) 8. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT DIVISION (KSTP), PONKUNNAM, KANJIRAPPILLYP.O., PIN-686 507.
9. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION (NH), PONKUNNAM -686 506.
10. M.J.
VARKEY, EX.M.P.,MATTATHIL HOUSE, PALA-PONKUNNAM ROAD, PALA-686 575.
11. T.M.PAUL, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, PALA- PONKUNNAM ROAD, PALA- 686 575.
12. NARAYANAN KUTTY, VARIKKANIKKAL, PALA -PONKUNNAM ROAD, PALA- 686 575.
13. SEBASTIAN CHANDY @ SIBY, S/O.LATE K.M.CHANDY (EX-GOVERNOR), KIZHAKKAYIL, PALA- PONKUNNAM ROAD, PALA- 686 575.
14. O.J.
KURUVILLA, AGED75YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, UPPUTTIL HOUSE, PALA P.O., PIN-686 575. R1 TO R10 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR.C.S. MANILAL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON3110-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. WP(C).No. 27494 of 2014 (J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION MALAYALA MANORAMA DATED2312.2004. EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONDATED0712.2004. EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED0205.2005. EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED0305.2005. EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE CHANGE. EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DATED0307.2005. EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED1612.2012 IN WP(C).NO. 846 OF2006 EXHIBIT P8. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED0506.2012 IN W.A. NO. 663 OF2012 EXHIBIT P9. COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE1T PETITIONER TO THE5H RESPONDENT ON0307.2012. EXHIBIT P10. COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE2D PETITIONER TO THE5H RESPONDENT ON0307.2012. EXHIBIT P11. COPY OF THE FORWARDING NOTE DATED3005.2012 ALONG WITH THE REPRESENTATION. EXHIBIT P12. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY9H RESPONDENT TO5H RESPONDENT ON0506.2013. EXHIBIT P13. COPY OF THE SKETCH APPENDED TO THE REPORT. EXHIBIT P14. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED0706.2012. EXHIBIT P15. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED0509.2012. EXHIBIT P16. COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS DATED0412.2012. EXHIBIT P17. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED0801.2013. EXHIBIT P18. COPY OF THE REPORT ALONG WITH THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED0310.2013. .......2/- WP(C).No. 27494 of 2014 (J) EXHIBIT P19. COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.C.2556/2013 DATED2801.2014 ISSUED BY THE6H RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P20. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
DATED2305.2014 IN WP(C).NO. 3433/2014. EXHIBIT P21. COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.LR(C)3-7712/14 DATED1309.2014. EXHIBIT P22. COPY OF THE ORDER
KEEPING THE PROCEEDINGS IN ABEYANCE RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON2108.2012. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
............................................................... W.P.(C).No.27494 of 2014 ................................................................ Dated this the 31st day of October, 2014
JUDGMENT
The writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P21order passed by the 3rd respondent in proceedings under the land Acquisition Act. It is the case of the petitioner that Ext.P21 order was passed by the 3rd respondent pursuant to the directions in Ext.P20 judgment, by which the 3rd respondent was directed to pass appropriate orders taking into account the report submitted by the land Acquisition Officer after conducting Section 5A enquiry and after hearing the petitioners, but Ext.P21 order, that was passed by the 3rd respondent thereafter, was passed without hearing the petitioners.
2. I have heard Sri.K.S.Hariharaputhran, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as also the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. The learned Government Pleader would submit that although the petitioner was not heard in the matter before passing Ext.P21 order, his contentions were contained in the representation filed by him and that was considered by the 3rd respondent. This submission of the learned Government Pleader is disputed by the petitioner. W.P.(C).No.27494 of 2014 -2- 4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I am of the view that insofar as by Ext.P20 judgment, this Court had specifically directed that the petitioners would also be heard before passing any orders in the matter, it was incumbent upon the 3rd respondent to hear the petitioners also before passing any order. The submission of the learned Government Pleader that the contentions of the petitioners were also considered by the 3rd respondent is of no avail since the rights accruing to the petitioners for a personal hearing, that were conferred by the judgment of this Court in Ext.P20, were not given effect to while passing Ext.21 order. Under these circumstances, I quash Ext.P21 order of the 3rd respondent and direct him to reconsider the mater afresh after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard for which due notice shall also be given to the petitioners. The 3rd respondent shall pass fresh orders in the matter within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. By way of abundant caution, and in view of the apprehension raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is made clear that the stay against coercive proceedings, that was granted during the earlier proceedings, will continue to hold good till fresh orders are passed by the 3rd respondent as directed in this judgment. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns W.P.(C).No.27494 of 2014 -3-