SHYAMALA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application filed by the petitioner herein for redetermination of compensation based on an award passed by the reference Court in respect of an item of property covered by the very same notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was rejected by the respondent by Exhibit P2 order on the ground that the properties, though covered under the very same notification, fell in different categories. The said order is assailed in this Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner states that property having an extent of 0.4031 hectares of land in Re-survey No.199/4 of Ramanthali Village was the subject matter of acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the purpose of establishing the Naval Academy at Ezhimala. The petitioner contends that in respect of another item of property covered under the very same notification, a person aggrieved by the award passed by the District Collector, had filed a reference application before the Sub Court, Payyannur as LAR No.117/16. The learned Subordinate Judge was pleased to pass an award enhancing the compensation. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner filed Exhibit P1 representation before the 2nd respondent seeking a reference under Section 28A of the Act. The said application came to be dismissed by Exhibit P2 order on the ground that the properties, though covered under the very same notification, fell into different categories. The aforesaid order is under challenge.

(3.) I have heard Sri.V.N. Ramesan Nambisan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government pleader.