IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN TUESDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF MAY 2023 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 35932 OF 2015 PETITIONER/S:

K.T.HASSANKOYA AGED 66 YEARS S/O. MOOSAKKUTTY HAJI, MENOTH HOUSE, PANNIYANKARA P.O., CALICUT-673003.

BY ADVS.

VINOD RAVINDRANATH MEENA.A.

K.C.KIRAN M.R.MINI M.DEVESH ASHWIN SATHYANATH RESPONDENT/S:

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-673020.

2 SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

3 SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-

695001.

4 SECRETARY KOZHIKODE CORPORATION, CALICUT-673032.

5 T.P.M.ZAHIR EX-MLA, 5/1479, SHARAFATH, P.O. ERANHIPALAM, CALICUT-673006.

BY ADVS.

V.KRISHNA MENON SRI.K.M.FIROZ SMT.M.SHAJNA SMT.FEMINA K.M.

OTHER PRESENT:

SPL.GP. S.RENJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

15.11.2022, THE COURT ON 23.05.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23^rd day of May, 2023 The petitioner is the owner of 90 cents of land in R.S.No.21-9-182 of Panniyankara Village, Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District. As per Ext.P2 letter dated 15.11.2003, the 5^th respondent who was the elected member of the Kozhikode-2 Legislative Constituency, within which the petitioner's property is situated, requested to give advance possession of a portion of petitioner's land for widening the road connecting Anamad and Chulikkal. The petitioner was also informed that the acquisition papers are being processed through the Revenue Department and the 5^th respondent also assured that the petitioner will get due compensation from the department. That the land will be utilised for a public purpose and would be beneficial for development of the petitioner's balance property was also pointed out. Based on the 5^th respondent's request, the petitioner gave oral consent for acquiring 15 cents for widening of the road. According to the petitioner, before the land was taken possession, he suffered a heart ailment and was bedridden, making it impossible for him to take follow up action after giving oral consent. The petitioner later realised that, instead of 15 cents, the road had been widened by utilising 18 cents of land. To the petitioner's dismay, no compensation, as assured in Ext.P2 letter of the 5^th respondent, was paid. He therefore took up the matter with the District Collector and the Secretary of Kozhikode Corporation through Exts.P3, P5, P10 representations, and followed it up with Ext.P11 lawyer notice. The representations and notice having failed to evoke any positive response, this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs;

“(i) declare that the act of the respondents in acquiring 18 cents of the petitioner's property is without complying with the requirements of the Land Acquisition Act, and therefore unconstitutional, without the authority of law and illegal.

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the respondents 1 to 4 to return the 18 cents of property acquired from the petitioner without complying with the requirements of the Land Acquisition Act;

(iii) in the alternative, to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the respondents 1 to 4 to pay compensation to the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 10 lakhs per cent for the 18 cents of property acquired from the petitioner (iv) Grant such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper to grant in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice.”

2. Learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the manner in which petitioner's property was acquired and utilised, militates against the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 21 and his constitutional right under Article 300A. It is submitted that Exts.P2 and P11 are proof of the fact that the petitioner was made to give consent by assuring payment of ad