Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DR.RAJAN VARGHESE, MAPPILASSERRY HOUSE versus DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT)

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


DR.RAJAN VARGHESE, MAPPILASSERRY HOUSE v. DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT) - WP(C) No. 29119 of 2006(N) [2006] RD-KL 3777 (19 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 29119 of 2006(N)

1. DR.RAJAN VARGHESE, MAPPILASSERRY HOUSE,
... Petitioner

2. DR.MRS.KOCHURANI RAJAN,

3. ALEYAMMA VARKEY.K.A.,

4. JOHN.K.A., KOTTAKKAL HOUSE,

5. SHEEBA JOHN, KOTTAKKAL HOUSE,

6. ANNAKUTTY CHACKO, MOOZHIYIL HOUSE,

7. V.G.THAMPI, VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE,

8. S.PADMANABHAN NAIR,

9. PRASANNAKUMARI, W/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR,

10. M.M.ABDUL KAREEM, VAZHACHALIYIL HOUSE,

11. K.V.MEERAVU, MARIYIL HOUSE,

Vs

1. DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT)
... Respondent

2. CHIEF ENGINEER (NATIONAL HIGHWAY),

3. PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY,

4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY

6. DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT),

7. THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS

8. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS

9. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS

For Petitioner :SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI

For Respondent :SRI.DINESH RAO

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.V.K.BALI The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

Dated :19/12/2006

O R D E R

V.K.Bali,C.J. & S.Siri Jagan,J.

W.P.(C).No.29119 of 2006-N

Dated, this the 19th day of December, 2006



JUDGMENT

V.K.Bali,C.J. (Oral) Dr.Rajan Varghese and others have filed this petition challenging anticipated acquisition of the petitioners' properties as per Exhibit P1 plan for Cochin-Madurai Highway. Primarily, it is the case of the petitioners that Exhibit P1 plan would disclose that in the proposed road, at a place where petitioners' own land, there occurs severe curves. It is conceded that so far notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act has not been issued. This petition appears to be premature. We dismiss this petition with an observation that as and when notification is issued under Section 4 of the Act, the petitioners may file their objections under Section 5A taking all objections including with regard to alignment. V.K.Bali Chief Justice S.Siri Jagan Judge vku/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.