Peethambaran C. P. and Beena Bai v. Union of India and others

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MAY 2022 / 29TH VAISAKHA, 1944 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** ``` 1PEETHAMBARAN C. P. AGED 69 YEARS S/O PUSHPANGADAN, CHAKKAMADATHIL HOUSE, THRIPAYAR, NATTIKA P. O., THRISSSUR - 680 566. ``` ``` 2BEENA BAI AGED 60 YEARS W/O. PEETHAMBARAN C. P., CHAKKAMADATHIL HOUSE, THRIPAYAR, NATTIKA P. O., THRISSSUR - 680 566. ``` ``` BY ADVS. P.SATHISAN DONA AUGUSTINE ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1UNION OF INDIA REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, CENTRAL DELHI P. O., NEW DELHI-110001. ``` ``` 2REGIONAL OFFICER NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, REGIONAL OFFICE - KERALA, T. C. 86/1036-1, AMBLY ARCADE, S. N. N. R.A. - 9, PETTAH P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695024. ``` ``` 3THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT KOCHI VII/511 B, NEITHELI -MAVELIPURAM ROAD, MAVELIPURAM, KAKKANAD, KERALA 682030. ``` ``` 4DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT) & SPECIAL SECRETARY, ROOM NO.213, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, 1, PARLIAMENT STREET, CENTRAL DELHI P. O., NEW DELHI-110001. ``` ``` 5PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (HEAD OFFICE), DWARAKA SECTOR 10, SOUTH WEST DELHI P.O., ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 2`** ``` NEW DELHI-110075. ``` ``` 6STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P.O., PIN - 695 001. ``` ``` 7SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION (NH17), CIVIL STATION, CIVIL LINES RD, KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, KERALA - 680 003. 8DISTRICT COLLECTOR FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, CIVIL LINES RD, KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, KERALA - 680 003. ``` ``` SMT.MABLE C. KURIAN, SRGP ``` ``` SHRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP - SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 3 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** The petitioners impugn Ext.P3 series of Awards on various grounds. However, Shri.P.Sathisan, their learned counsel, to a pointed question from this Court, conceded that once the Awards had been issued by the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) appointed under the provisions of the National Highways Act ('NH Act' for short), he has been rendered _functus officio,_ as has been declared by this Court in _**Usman Arif v. National Highway Authority of India [2022 (1) KLT 35).**_ He, therefore, prayed that his clients be allowed to approach the statutory Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the “NH Act”. 2. Shri.P.Sathisan then added that, while doing so, his clients may also be allowed to take up every issue, including the fact that 6% has been deducted from the Awards as 'salvage' even though his clients had informed the CALA that they do not intend to take away the remnants of the building standing on the acquired land; and that the proper nature and value of the land had not been reckoned even though this Court had declared the law emphatically in Ext.P4 ## **`WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 4`** judgment in this regard. He concluded saying that there is a third issue involved in this case, namely, that on account of the acquisition, a small strip of land has been rendered completely useless and that declarations of this Court in Ext.P11 judgment would cover it. 3. The learned Senior Government Pleader - Smt.Mable C.Kurian, responded saying that this writ petition is unnecessary and not maintainable, since the alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioners, namely under Section 3G(5) of the “NH Act”, has not even been invoked yet. She, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed. 4. Shri.Mathews K.Philip, learned Standing Counsel for the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), submitted that without a challenge to Ext.P3 series of Awards before the statutory Arbitrator, this Court cannot entertain this writ petition; however, adding that if and when the petitioners choose to invoke such remedy, the competent official of the NHAI may also be directed to be heard by the Arbitrator. ## **`WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 5`** 5. When I consider the afore submissions, it is without doubt that, on Ext.P3 series of Awards being issued, the CALA has been rendered _functus officio_ and this is admitted by all sides. Indubitably, therefore, the petitioners must invoke their alternative remedy under Section 3G(5) of the “NH Act” before the statutory Arbitrator; and I am certain that this Court will be justified in granting that liberty to them. Resultantly, I order this writ petition with the following directions: (a) The petitioners will be at liberty to prefer appropriate applications under Section 3G(5) of the “NH Act” before the statutory Arbitrator; and if this is done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, same shall be considered by the said Authority taking note of all relevant inputs including Exts.P4, P9, P9(a) and P11 judgments, if the petitioners impel the contentions as has been recorded above. - (b) The statutory Arbitrator shall endeavour to dispose of the - applications, to be preferred by the petitioners, as early as possible, ## **`WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 6`** adverting to every precedent and every aspect of law as may be relevant and after affording necessary opportunity of being heard to them, as also the competent official of the NHAI. (c) I leave liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court for fixing a time frame in the event the statutory Arbitrator does not dispose of their applications, to be filed in terms of direction (a), within a period of eight months from the date on which they are preferred, which will then be considered by this Court taking into account all relevant and germane aspects at that time. ``` Sd/- ``` ``` DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN ``` ``` JUDGE ``` ``` MC/19.5 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 7`** ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16160/2022`** ## `PETITIONER EXHIBITS` - `Exhibit P1` - `TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF SALE DEED NO.2391/93 DATED 27.11.1993 OF THRIPRAYAR SRO.` - `Exhibit P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF SALE DEED NO.2392/93 DATED 02.12.1993 OF THRIPRAYAR SRO.` - `Exhibit P1(b) TRUE COPY OF OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE NO.5075801/1446/2021 DATED 27.08.2021 ISSUED BY NATTIKA GRAMA PANCHAYATH.` - `Exhibit P1(c) TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT NO.KL08040204303/2020 DATED 27.07.2020.` - `Exhibit P1(d) TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT NO.KL08040206548/2021 DATED 05.11.2021.` - `Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.29/2022/TAXES DATED 30.03.2022.` - `Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF 3G AWARD HAVING NO.1/2021E4/NAT/012700/2022 DATED 07.01.2022.` - `Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF 3G AWARD HAVING NO.1/2021E4/NAT/006774/2021 DATED 07.01.2022.` - `Exhibit P3(b) TRUE COPY OF 3G AWARD HAVING NO.1/2021E4/NAT/006752/2021 DATED 25.01.2022.` - `Exhibit P3(c) TRUE COPY OF 3G AWARD HAVING NO.1/2021E4/NAT/006776/2021 DATED 25.01.2022.` - `Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.3562 OF 2021 DATED 24.09.2021.` - `Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.A76158/22 DATED 04.04.2022 ISSUED BY NATTIKA GRAMA PANCHAYATH.` - `Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE` ``` WP(C) NO. 16160 OF 2022 8 ``` ``` STRIP OF LAND. ``` ``` Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 29.12.2021. ``` - `Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 29.12.2021.` - `Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.23142 OF 2021 DATED 30.11.2021.` - `Exhibit P9(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.27967 OF 2021 DATED 16.12.2021.` - `Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION DATED 28.08.2015.` - `Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.11571 OF 2022 DATED 31.03.2022.` - `Exhibit P11(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.29525 OF 2021 DATED 05.04.2022.`