Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

Y.LUCOSE versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Y.LUCOSE v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - WP(C) No. 34014 of 2006(Y) [2007] RD-KL 530 (8 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 34014 of 2006(Y)

1. Y.LUCOSE,
... Petitioner

2. JULY AMMA, W/O. LATE S.THOMAS,

3. JILLARIOUS,

4. HAMEEDU KUNJU,

5. YOOSUF KUNJU,

6. SARAMMA,

7. SAINABA BEEVI,

8. NABEESA BEEVI,

9. STEPHEN,

10. NELSON,

11. MARY AUGUSTINE, D/O. AUGUSTINE,

12. THOBIAS CLEETUS,

13. IBRAHIMKUTTY,

14. GEORGE CLEMANT,

15. SHAMSUDEEN KUNJU,

16. GREGORY MYCHAEL,

17. IBRAHIMKUTTY,

18. DAISY, W/O. SEBASTIAN,

19. ARKANS JOSEPH,

20. NIRMALA,

21. ABOOBACKER KUNJU,

22. SILVESTER, S/O. LATE ANNA,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (L.A.),

For Petitioner :SRI.S.SUNIL NARAYANAN

For Respondent :ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :08/01/2007

O R D E R

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

................................................................................... W.P.(C) No. 34014 OF 2006 ...................................................................................

Dated this the 8th January , 2007



J U D G M E N T

Lands belonging to the petitioners were acquired for the purpose of erecting Chavara distributory of the right bank canal of the Kallada Irrigation Project as per notification dated 19.01.1983. The award passed in favour of the petitioners has become final and no application for reference was made by them. However in L.A.R. No.140/1996, Ext.P1 judgment was passed, enhancing compensation amount in favour of two other persons. Petitioners filed Exts. P2 to P23 applications under section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act .

2. Learned Government Pleader submitted that applications were received on 09.12.2004. Those applications were not disposed of so far. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issue of a writ of mandamus directing respondents Nos. 2 and 3 to consider and dispose of Exts. P2 to P23 applications under section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act . It is submitted W.P.(C) No. 34014 OF 2006 2 by the Government Pleader that hundreds of applications under section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act are pending before the 3rd respondent and that the applications are being disposed of in accordance with the priority.

3. There will be a direction to the third respondent to dispose of Exts.P2 to P23 applications in accordance with the priority, at any rate, within a period of three months from today. Writ Petition is allowed as above. K.T. SANKARAN,

JUDGE.

lk


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.