SAINATH MANDIR TRUST Vs. VIJAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging the validity of the Kovalam Palace (Taking Over By Resumption) Act, 2005 enacted by the State of Kerala. Petitioners seek a declaration that the said statute is ultra vires and unconstitutional. They also seek ancillary reliefs. Background of the impugned enactment.

(2.) At the outset, for sake of brevity, it can be noted that the impugned legislation was brought in, in the wake of the judgment of this Court in W.A. No. 1796/04 and connected case, even going by the preamble to the Act. The disputes between the State Government on the one hand and the Union Government and the India Tourism Development Corporation (ITDC) on the other gathered momentum with the ITDC and the Union of India proceeding with the proposal for disinvestment and in such process of disinvestment and re structuring, the Kovalam Asoka Beach Resort was transfered to M/s. Kovalam Hotels Private Ltd., which, in turn, brought in M. Far Hotels Ltd, the Appellant in W.A.1796/04 and Hotel Leelaventure Ltd., the second Petitioner in this writ petition.

(3.) In terms of the directions contained in the judgment in W.A.1796/04 (Ext.P29), the State of Kerala and its Revenue officials stood obliged under that judicial order to put the writ Petitioners in that case back in possession of the items of properties taken over from them. The Government applied before this Court for enlargement of time to do so and moved the Apex Court for special leave to appeal against that judgment and then brought in an ordinance (Ext.P34) as a forerunner; followed by the impugned statute (Ext.P36) being published on 12.8.2005, which provides for taking over Kovalam Palace by resumption notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, for the time being in force or in any judgment, decree or order of any court or in any contract or other document. It also provides that the dispossession of the writ Petitioners in Ext.P29 on 27.9.2004 which was annulled by this Court by quashing the Government Order dated 25.9.2004 shall be deemed to have been taking over of possession under the provisions of the impugned Act and such possession shall be deemed to have been validly taken under the provisions of that Act, on and from 27.9.2004. The impugned legislation also provides for a general vesting of the Kovalam Palace notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any judgment, decree or order of any court or in any contract or other arrangement. It also contains a deeming provision that all persons in charge of that site have vacated their charge of management on such commencement of vesting. The impugned statute provides for payment for any improvement made in Kovalam Palace on or after 1970 to date of resumption as per the Act and the principles to be observed in payment of such compensation are also provided for. The impugned statute also enjoins that the provisions thereof shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any law other than the said Act. The jurisdiction of the civil court to determine any matter is also barred except to the extent of any provision in that regard in the Act. Petitioners' contentions and arguments.