ALIYARKUTTY .K.A Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have approached this Court with the following prayers:

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners 1, 2 and 4 are residing in the Puramboke , on the side of the National Highway-47 and that they have effected various improvements in the said property. The third petitioner is pursuing some commercial transactions in similar puramboke on the side of NH-47. The NH-47 is sought to be widened for 'six lane' mode under a particular scheme and steps are going on. Pursuant to Ext.P1 Minutes of the meeting held on 21.12.2011 and the proceedings taken earlier, there were some understanding to provide compensation in respect of persons like the petitioners. Clause '3' of the said Minutes shows that the NHAI had agreed to provide lump sum amount as development charges to the evictees who are dwelling on puramboke land and as such the District Collector was required to calculate value of the structures plus an additional ex-gratia amount as considered just, at the same time handing over the land free of encroachment to the NHAI.

(3.) THE learned Standing Counsel for the National Highway Authority, on instruction, submits that the said respondents have already honoured their commitment and undertaking by depositing necessary compensation payable with the 6th respondent. It is pointed out that the compensation payable in terms of the Minutes, to the petitioners stands already deposited on 22.03.2011. It is also pointed out that, originally the compensation was intended to be paid only in respect of residential buildings situated in the puramboke land. Subsequently, it was decided by the NH authorities to pay compensation to all concerned, irrespective of the fact whether the improvements are in respect of residential or commercial buildings.