1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking declaration that Ext.P4 award has been lapsed as against the properties and buildings of the petitioners described as Holdings No.10, 11 and 12 in Ext.P4, and a further declaration that the petitioners are not liable to be dispossessed of their properties and buildings described in Ext.P4. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

2. First petitioner is the owner in possession of 1 cent of land in R.S.No.33/7 of Pazhassi amsom, Mattannur desom and the buildings bearing No.VII/895 and VII/894, evident from Ext.P1. The 2nd petitioner is the owner of property covered by Ext.P2 document and the 3rd petitioner is the owner of property covered by Ext.P3. The Government of Kerala issued notification under Sec.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short, 'Act, 1894] and published in the Kerala Gazette dated 22.01.2005, proposing to acquire the properties belonging to the petitioners for the purpose of widening a road. Thereafter, a declaration under Sec.6 of the Act, 1894 was issued on 27.09.2006.

3. Finally, after conducting an award enquiry, award dated 21.10.2008 was passed by the 2nd respondent as Award No.128 of 2008, evident from Ext.P4. In Ext.P4, petitioners properties acquired were described as holdings No.10, 11 and 12 respectively. As per the award, Rs.2,47,156/-, Rs.4,79,985/- and Rs.6,40,027/- were fixed as compensation payable to the petitioners respectively. However, no compensation was paid to the petitioners or deposited in the name of the petitioners. The possession of the property was also not taken and the petitioners are still in possession of the properties proposed to be acquired as per Ext.P4.

4. Petitioners have approached the Mattannur Municipality for their rehabilitation on account of the acquisition of the property, and thereafter filed W.P.(C) No.20168 of 2010 before this Court and as per judgment dated 16.01.2014, this Court directed the respondents to conduct a survey as provided in the scheme for rehabilitation without hindrance to the acquisition proceedings, evident from Ext.P5. The contention advanced by the petitioners is that, the award was passed in the year 2008, compensation was not paid and the possession of the properties were not taken, and therefore, by virtue of Sec.24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [for short, 'Act, 2013'] will come into play and the lands acquired and award passed as per Ext.P4 shall be deemed to have lapsed. It is thus seeking appropriate reliefs, petitioners have filed this writ petition.

5. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent, wherein, the contention raised by the petitioners with respect to the notifications, enquiry and the passage of award etc. etc. are not at all under dispute. It is also not under dispute, that, possession of the properties are not taken and amounts are not paid to the petitioners. The sole material contention raised in the counter affidavit is that, writ petition filed by the petitioners was pending before this Court as W.P. (C) No.20168 of 2010, and therefore, the respondents could not pay or deposit the amount, and the possession could not taken. Therefore, the period during which the writ petition was pending before this Court shall be excluded in contemplation of Sec.11A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. First respondent has also filed a counter affidavit in similar lines and contends that the petitioners are not entitled to get any relief as is sought for in the writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has heavily relied on Sec.24 of Act, 2013, dealing with “Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases”, which read thus:

“24. Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any