SAINUDEEN KUNJU Vs. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent, which is the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA), appointed under the provisions of National Highways Act (NH Act), to review Exts.P1 and P2 Awards, taking note of the pendency of the proceedings with respect to the property acquired under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act.

(2.) The petitioners explain that they have already moved Ext.P6 application before the 4th respondent - RDO, under the provisions of the "Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act" and therefore, that the CALA is now obligated to take into account the change of attributes of the property, without being confined by the classification of it as a "wetland" in the Revenue Records.

(3.) Even when I hear Smt.Anjana Kannath - learned counsel for the petitioners on the afore lines, the fact remains that the issues in this case are covered by the judgment of this Court in Usman Arif v. The Project Director (WP(C)No.1996/2021 and connected cases).