JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers : (i) declare that the 3rd respondent Municipality need not seek prior permission as sought for in Ext. P7 for acquiring the land comprised in Re-Sy. No. 242/14 of Neduva Village for the construction of approach road to railway underpass at Puthenpeedika in view of the dictum laid down in 2018 (1) KHC 551 (Mammu. V. vs Ramanattukara Municipality and others);

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to proceed with the acquisition of land as sought for in Ext. P7 in accordance with the mandate of Rule 3 of the Kerala Municipality (Acquisition and Disposal of Property) Rules , 2000 and the dictum laid down in Mammu. V. vs Ramanattukara Municipality and others ( 2018 (1) KHC 551 );

(iii) direct the 3rd respondent to proceed with the acquisition of the land comprised in Re-Sy. No. 242/14 of Neduva Village as sought for in Ext. P7 and construct the approach road to Puthenpeedika railway underpass as expeditiously as possible;

(iv) direct the 1st respondent to grant permission to the 3rd respondent to acquire the land and proceed with the construction of approach road as recommended by the 2nd respondent in Ext. P8;

(v) direct the 1st respondent to consider Ext. P18 as expeditiously as possible in the light of the dictum laid down in 2018 (1) KHC 551 and permit the 3rd respondent to proceed with the construction of approach road to the railway underpass at Puthenpeedika without awaiting the permission of the 1st respondent;

(vi) dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents;

(vii) grant such other relief’s as this Honorable Court may deem fit in the circumstances of this case.” [sic]

2. The petitioners are residents of ward Nos.28, 17, 18 and 31 respectively of the 3^rd respondent-Municipality. It is submitted that during 2017, a railway underpass was constructed connecting ward Nos. 28 and 31 of the above Municipality. The approach road could not be constructed at that stage. For constructing the approach road, a parcel of land having an extent of 14.5 cents comprised in Re-survey Nos. 242/14, 242/26 and 242/27 of Neduva Village belonged to four persons are required. Out of the four persons, three persons are willing to surrender their properties. So, the 3^rd respondent has to acquire an extent of 2.97 ares corresponding to 7.33 cents comprised in Re-survey No. 242/14 of Neduva Village is the submission. The 3^rd respondent approached the 1^st respondent seeking permission to acquire the land as early as in the year 2022 is the submission. After several communications, the 3^rd respondent was constrained to submit Ext.P7 application in the proper form as directed by the 1^st respondent and produced all the documents sought for is the further submission. The 2^nd respondent by Ext.P8 communication dated 16.02.2024 recommended to the 1^st respondent to grant permission as sought for by the 3^rd respondent. But, the 1^st respondent issued Ext.P9 communication and directed the 3^rd respondent to produce documents which are not required and not possible to proceed is the further submission. Ext.P18 is the latest reply submitted by the 3^rd respondent is the further submission. According to the petitioners, in the light of the principle laid down by this Court in Mammu. v. Ramanattukara Municipality and others [ 2018 (1) KHC 551 ], no permission is contemplated when the Municipality acquire any land from the Government.

Hence, this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, Government Pleader and the Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality.

4. Th