JUDGMENT

The petitioners have approached this Court with a singular plea that the 1st respondent – District Collector, be directed to consider Ext.P9 representation of theirs, before passing an Award with respect to their property, which has been acquired for the purposes of the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI).

2. Smt.C.K.Sherin – learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that her clients have preferred Ext.P9 before the 1st respondent - District Collector because they are in absolute possession and ownership over the property in question, but that they are still being denied eligible compensation. She thus prayed that the District Collector be also directed to pass an Award and to refer the same under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Fair Compensation Act’ for short), without any further delay.

3. Sri.Salil Narayanan – learned Standing Counsel for the NHAI, opposed the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, saying that this Writ Petition has been filed in haste and that the cause of action is premature. He submitted that Ext.P9 cannot be filed before the District Collector, who is the competent Arbitrator under the National Highways Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NH Act’ for short) and that it is the 3rd respondent – Special Deputy Collector who is the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA for short) under the said Act, to take any decision on the various assertions of the petitioners and to pass an Award. He, therefore, prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed.

4. Smt.Mable C. Kurian – learned Government Pleader, adopted the afore submissions of Sri.Salil Narayanan, adding that the CALA is in the process of issuing Awards and that she is not aware if, in the case of the petitioners, any Award has already been issued.

5. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is without doubt that, going by the Statutory Scheme under the ‘NH Act’, the District Collector has no role to play before an Award is issued by the CALA. If the petitioners have any specific claims to be impelled, they must certainly place it before the CALA for appropriate action based on which, the said Authority can then issue an Award in terms of the NH Act. In fact, they also seen to be aware of this since they say that they have approached the CALA through Ext.P9 application.

In the afore circumstances, I order this Writ Petition directing the CALA to take up and dispose of the applications of the petitioners - as evidenced by Ext.P9 – after affording necessary opportunities of being heard to them, thus leading to appropriate Award/s being issued.

It also goes without saying that I have not considered the contentions of the petitioners on its merits and that they are all left open to be pursued appropriately before the CALA.

Sd/-

RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1544/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 06/12/2014 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, AMBALAPUZHA.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED16/07/2021 ISSUED BY THE PUNNAPRA GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

Exhibit P2(A) TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED

16/07/2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMARY OF THE BILLS ISSUED FROM THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF DUPLICATE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 15/05/1992 ISSUED BY ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, AMBALAPUZHA TO THE PETITIONER'S FATHER.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 07/06/2019 ISSUED BY PUNNAPRA SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

Exhibit P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 07/06/2019 ISSUED BY PUNNAPRA SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF BUILDING AGE CERTIFICATE DATED 12/01/2022 ISSUED BY THE PUNNAPRA SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

Exhibit P6(A) TRUE COPY OF BUILDING AGE CERTIFICATE DATED 12/01/2022 ISSUED BY THE PUNNAPRA SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 06/01/2022 ISSUED BY MILMA.

Exhib