High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2010-08-10Disposed of on the directions issued above; the...

C.H. Fazlu Rahman & Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:W.P.(C).No.2110/2009-A

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: T. R. Ramachandran Nair
Judgment Date: 2010-08-10
Court Decision / Holding: There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to sanction the amount and issue a Letter of Credit to the PWD within two months, and to pass the Awards and disburse the compensation to the petitioners within three months from today, after making available funds. The entitlement of the petitioners under the Land Acquisition Act will also be considered while passing the Award. This writ petition is disposed of as above.
Final Disposition: Disposed of on the directions issued above; the court ordered expeditious payment of compensation subject to funds being made available by the Government.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

C.H. Fazlu Rahman
C.H. Hyderali
C.P. Muhammed Shaji
Kadeeja C.
K. Ismailkutty
K. Hussain
P. Kunhammad

Respondents

The State of Kerala, represented by the Secretary to the Government, Public Works Department, Government Secretariat, Trivandrum
The Chief Engineer, P.W.D. Roads and Bridges, Trivandrum
The Executive Engineer, P.W.D (Roads Division), Manjeri, Malappuram District
The District Collector, Malappuram
The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition (General), Malappuram

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Adv. Sri. Babu S. Nair

Counsels for Respondents

• Government Pleader SMT. N. Sudha Devi

Case Synopsis & Summary

Petitioners, residents of Kodoor in Malappuram District, challenged the non-payment of compensation for lands acquired for construction of an approach road to Nooradi Bridge under the urgency provisions invoked in the Land Acquisition Act. Notifications invoking urgency under Section 4(1) were issued, lands surrendered, and the approach road and bridge were in use from 2005. The District Collector directed fast-track acquisition with a target award within eight months and disbursal of compensation, but the petitioners have not received any payment. The petition relies on Fr. Paul Chakiath v. State of Kerala to contend that acquisition proceedings cannot be deemed elapsed due to inaction by the requisitioning authorities. The counter-affidavit reveals that the Government sanctioned the requisition and that funds from the Requisitioning Authority were necessary to pass awards; despite repeated requests, funds were not provided, preventing award passage and disbursement. The petitioners point to ongoing land use for widening and formation of immediate approaches with owners’ consent and traffic restoration. The court directed the Government to sanction funds and issue a Letter of Credit to the PWD within two months, to pass awards and disburse compensation within three months, and to consider entitlement under the Land Acquisition Act, disposing of the petition accordingly.

Provisions of Law Cited

Land Acquisition Act, Section 4(1)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Urgency clause under the Land Acquisition Act
fast-track project principle

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended that the urgency clause under the Land Acquisition Act was invoked and the land was acquired for the Nooradi Bridge approach road. The responses show the road has been used since 2005, yet compensation remains unpaid for nearly five years due to inaction by respondents 1 and 2. They argue that the fast-track award process has not yielded payment because funds were never provided by the Requisitioning Authority, despite repeated assurances. They rely on the decision in Fr. Paul Chakiath v. State of Kerala (2005(3)KLT 182) to urge that the acquisition cannot be deemed to have elapsed and that compensation must be paid expeditiously. They request the court to direct sanction of funds, issue a Letter of Credit to the PWD, and pass and disburse awards within a short period, while considering entitlements under the Act.

Contentions of Respondents

The counter affidavit explains that the Requisitioning Authority sanctioned approvals and that funds were required before awards could be passed. The letters and proceedings indicate repeated requests for funds from the Government since 2008, and the award enquiry took place in 2008. It is argued that lands were used with owners’ consent and traffic restored, but without funds, the Land Acquisition Officer cannot finalize awards or disburse compensation. The Respondents contend that payments can only be effected once funds are available and that expediency depends on government action.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Fr. Paul Chakiath v. State of Kerala	2005(3)KLT 182	Positive	Cited to support the proposition that acquisition proceedings cannot be said to have elapsed and that compensation must be paid expeditiously.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against C.H. Fazlu Rahman & Others v. State of Kerala and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT :** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR** **TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932** **WP(C).No. 2110 of 2009(A)** **-------------------------------------** **PETITIONERS:** - **---------------------** **1. C.H.FAZLU RAHMAN, S/O.MUHAMMED HAJI, AGED 33 YEARS, CHEKIDAPURATH HOUSE, VADAKKEMANNA, KODOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **2. C.H.HYDERALI, S/O.KUTTIHASSAN HAJI, CHOLASSERY HOUSE, VADAKKEMANNA, KODOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **3. C.P.MUHAMMED SHAJI, S/O.RUKHIYA, CHERUKADU POTTEKKADU HOUSE, VADAKKEMANNA, KODOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **4. KADEEJA.C., W/O.IBRAHIM HAJI, CHEKKATH HOUSE, KUZHIPURAM, OTHUKKUNGAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **5. K.ISMAILKUTTY, KALAPPADAN HOUSE, MAILAPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **6. K.HUSSAIN, S/O.ISMAILKUTTY, KALAPPADAN HOUSE, NOORADI, KODOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **7. P.KUNHAHAMMED, S/O.CHEKKU, PARAVATH HOUSE, NOORADI, KODOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR.** ## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:** **-----------------------------------------------** **1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.** **2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, P.W.D.ROADS AND BRIDGES, TRIVANDRUM.** **W.P.(C). NO.2110/2009-A:** ## **3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,** **P.W.D (ROADS DIVISION), MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** ## **4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,** **MALAPPURAM.** ## **5. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION** **(GENERAL), MALAPPURAM.** **R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **W.P.(C). NO.2110/2009-A:** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:** **EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE R.1. AS G.O.(RT).NO.72/2005/PWD DTD. 17/01/2005.** **EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE R.5. AS NO. A-877/04 DTD. 26/10/2005.** **EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 02/07/2005 ISSUED BY THE R.4. AS NO. L.A. 25652/2005.** **EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE R.5. TO THE R.3. DTD. 27/03/2008.** **EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS PUT ON THE FLOOR OF THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ON 25/11/2008.** **EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. FR.5-14293/2007 DTD. 26/11/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE R.1.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:** **EXT.R3.A: AN ALIGNMENT PLAN SHOWING TOTAL LAND REQUIRED AND THE LAND ALREADY UTILIZED FOR THE WORK.** **EXT.R3.B: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (PWD), ROADS DIVISION, MANJERI IS ADDRESSED TO CHIEF ENGINEER.** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A. TO JUDGE.** **Prv.** ## **T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.** **--------------------------------------W.P.(C) No.2110 OF 2009 --------------------------------------Dated this the 10[th] day of August, 2010.** ## **J U D G M E N T** The petitioners are the residents of Kodoor in Malappuram District. For the purpose of construction of an approach road for Nooradi Bridge in Malappuram, the properties of the petitioners were acquired. Exhibit P1 is the notification issued by the Government invoking the urgency clause under the Land Acquisition Act. Exhibit P2 is the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act. The properties were surrendered and the approach road has been constructed, and the bridge was put to use for traffic also from 2005 onwards. 2. Exhibit P3 is the proceedings issued by the District Collector which reflects the decision to expedite the acquisition proceedings as a fast track project, to pass the Award within a period of eight months and to distribute the compensation also accordingly. Till now, the petitioners are not paid the compensation, is the complaint raised in the writ petition. **W.P.(C) No.2110/2009** **2** 3. Going by Exhibit P4 communication, the total amount required for disbursement of compensation will be Rs.5.5 crores. The same is clear from the reply given in the floor of the Kerala Legislative Assembly, which is evidenced by Exhibit P5 dated 25.11.2008. The 2[nd] respondent has thereafter requested the Government, as per Exhibit P6, to see that the amount allotted for payment of compensation to the parties concerned. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in spite of the lapse of nearly 5 years, the petitioners are yet to receive the compensation. It is pointed out that the urgency clause was invoked and it is only because of the inaction of the respondents 1 and 2 that the compensation is not received by the petitioners so far. 5. The 5[th] respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The Requisitioning Authority is PWD and the requisition was made by the Executive Engineer and appropriate sanction was given by the Government as per G.O.(Rt) No.937/2004/PWD dated 24.09.2004, and to invoke the urgency clause also the Government accorded sanction as per G.O.(Rt) No.72/2005/PWD **W.P.(C) No.2110/2009** **3** dated 17.01.2005. Various proceedings dealing with acquisition have been detailed in the counter affidavit. 6. The counter affidavit also shows that the Award enquiry was conducted on 15[th] to 18[th] of April 2008. The draft Award can be submitted by the Land Acquisition Officer for previous approval only on obtaining necessary funds from the Requisitioning Authority and strict directions were given to the Requisitioning Authority to submit the same several times from 26.03.2008. It is stated that such repeated requests were made on 03.05.2008, 24.05.2008, 19.06.2008 and 03.12.2008 and the fund has not been provided so far. The Land Acquisition Officer could not pass the Awards and disburse the amount to the parties. 7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in the light of the decision of this Court in _**Fr. Paul Chakiath** vs._ _**State of Kerala**_ **(2005(3)KLT 182)** , the acquisition proceedings cannot be said to have elapsed. The petitioners could not receive the compensation so far in spite of the road being constructed and put to use for lack of availability **W.P.(C) No.2110/2009** **4** of funds by the Requisitioning Authority. Any offer to pay the amount will not help them and payments will have to be effected expeditiously. 8. It is clear from the counter affidavit filed by the 3[rd] respondent that the properties of the petitioners along with that of 10 others have been utilised for the widening and formation of immediate approaches of the bridge on consent of the owners. The traffic was restored on 13.01.2005. In paragraph 7 therein it is stated that the amount required to pass the Awards of the above mentioned L.A case will immediately be placed under the disposal of Revenue Department on receipt of Letter of Credit from the Government. Therefore, the entire thing depends upon the further immediate action on the part of the Government, in the light of the unreasonable delay in the whole matter. There will be a direction to the 1[st] respondent to see that the amount is sanctioned and Letter of Credit is issued to the PWD within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Every efforts should be made to pass the **W.P.(C) No.2110/2009** **5** Awards and disburse the compensation to the petitioners after making available the funds by the Government. The same shall be done by the respondents 1 to 5 and the amount shall be disbursed to the petitioners within a period of three months from today. While passing the Award, the entitlement of the petitioners for various benefits under the Land Acquisition Act will also be considered. This writ petition is disposed of as above. ## **T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE** smp