JUDGMENT

Late Sri. Mohammed Afsal was the absolute owner in title and possession of property comprised in Re-Sy. No. 129/6 (After survey 129/8) of Uppala Village, Kasaragod. The said property was acquired for the purpose of widening the National Highway and Ext.P2 award was passed on 26.9.2020. Immediately thereafter, the aforesaid Mohammed Afsal was requested by Ext.P1 notice to produce the original documents and other records to substantiate that he is entitled to receive the compensation. The petitioner contends that Mohammed Afsal had passed away on 13.9.2020 as is evident from Ext.P3 and that the petitioners 1 to 3 are his legal heirs. It is further contended that the 4th petitioner had purchased ½ portion of the property as per Ext.P5 document executed by Hashmathunnisa, on 23.8.2016 and he is entitled to ½ right over the property. Reliance is placed on Exts.P6 to P9 to substantiate the said contention. According to the petitioners, since Exts.P1 and P2 proceedings were issued to a person who is now no more, the petitioners were not aware of the same. When they came to know about the acquisition proceedings, the petitioners submitted Ext.P10 representation on 9.6.2021 before the 2nd respondent requesting for disbursal of compensation to the petitioners by awarding 50% of the amount due to the petitioners 1 to 3 and the balance 50% to the 4th respondent. Their grievance is that though Ext.P10 was submitted on 9.6.2021, no action has been taken on the same. It is in the above backdrop that the petitioners are before this Court seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P10 petition in accordance with law and in an expeditious manner.

2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that it is one thing to say that the petitioners 1 to 3 are the legal heirs of the deceased Mohammed Afsal, but it is yet another thing to say that the 4th petitioner is entitled to 50% share of the compensation amount. It is further contended that Section 3H would enable the competent authority to determine the person/s who are entitled to receive the amount payable to each of them. Furthermore, sub-clause (4) of Section 3H of the National Highways Act, 1956 states that if there is any dispute as to the apportionment of the amount, the dispute would be referred to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction.

3. I have considered the submissions. It appears that Ext.P1 and P2 have been issued in the name of a person who is now no more. Ext.P3 and P4 certificates substantiate the fact that Mohammed Afsal had passed away on 13.9.2020. The petitioners 1 to 3 claim that they are the wife and children and the 4th petitioner claims that he has acquired ½ right on the strength of Ext.P5 sale deed. These are matters which can be considered by the competent authority while invoking powers under Section 3H.

Necessary directions can be issued to the competent authority to consider Ext.P10, which is styled as an application for impleadment and take a decision.

In the result, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the

2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass expeditious orders on Ext.P10 application filed by the petitioners, with notice to them and strictly in accordance with law. Orders shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE ps APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13143/2021 PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED

26.9.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF AWARD IN LAC NO.138/UPPALA VILLAGE DATED 26.9.2020 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 6.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF MANGALORE.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LEGAL HEIR CERTIFICATE BEARING NO.RDOO38847357799 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 ALONG WITH ITS TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

EXHIBIT P