E.S.NAMBOODIRI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issues involved in all these writ petitions are the same, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Messrs. S. Easwaran Namboodiri, E.S. Namboodiri and E. Easwaran Namboodiri were the owners of 2.7 acres of dry land in Survey Nos.40/7 and 40/7-10 of new sub division and 34 cents of wet land in Survey No.40/6 of Chennithala Village, Mavelikkara Taluk. The property belonged to a family consisting of 17 members. The property comprised in Survey No.40/4 owned by the family was acquired for the purpose of Central Reserve Police Camp. When the camp was shifted elsewhere, that land was used for the purpose of setting up of 'Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya'. The family had also surrendered one acre of land by negotiated sale for the purpose of expansion of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, based on the request made by local M.L.A and the District Collector. The family was given the impression that no more land would be required and acquired for the purpose of the School.

(3.) Meanwhile, Government of Kerala, the 1 st respondent, issued Ext.P1 notification dated 26.11.1997 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act ('the Act', for short) read with Section 17(4) of the Act, for acquisition of 13.6 ares of land in Re-survey No.40/6 and 11.5 ares of land in Re-survey No.40/7 owned by the petitioners for the use of Navodaya Vidyalaya. Later, Ext.P6 declaration dated 21.06.1999 under Section 6 of the Act was issued by the 1st respondent. Challenging Ext.P1 notification under Section 4(1) and Ext.P6 declaration under Section 6, Sri. S. Easwaran Namboodiri and his sons Sri. E.S. Namboodiri and Sri.E. Easwaran Namboodiri filed O.P. No.26573/1999 before this Court. In the said Original Petition, it was averred that the property sought to be acquired is a serpent grove (Sarpa kavu), which was in existence from time immemorial and the trees standing in the area are considered as very sacred and no trees in the area were being cut and the Navodaya Vidyalaya had already been established and is functioning and the petitioners have already surrendered enough land for the same. Though the Government once informed that they have withdrawn the said land from acquisition proceedings, that decision was later withdrawn. It was alleged that Section 17(4) of the Act was invoked only to see that right given to the petitioners under Section 5(A) of the Act shall not be invoked.