NAJEEB RAWTHER Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Land belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of widening of Punalur- Ponkunnam road. Notification under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 9.4.2005. Exts.P-6 and P-7 awards were passed on 9.5.2006. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that the amount awarded as compensation is not paid to him and that his applications for reference under S.18 of the Land Acquisition Act have not been disposed of. The petitioner also claims interest at 18% on the amount of compensation. The contention of the petitioner is that there was some dispute regarding the demarcation of the boundaries of the land and he had approached this Court in W.P.(C) 6600 of 2006 which was disposed of as per Ext.P-8 judgment dated 20.7.2006. In Ext.P-8 judgment it was noticed that the Tahsildar had already initiated proceedings under R.43 of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Rules and therefore it was not necessary to render any finding on the disputed question of fact. However, it was ordered that till the proceedings are completed, the existing boundaries of the land should not be altered and that further proceedings for acquisition shall be in accordance with the survey and demarcation conducted as per the proceedings initiated under R.43 of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Rules. Ext.P-8 judgment and proceedings thereon may not have any relevance in so far as this Writ Petition is concerned. A contention is raised in the counter-affidavit by the second respondent that the amount of compensation was not directly paid to the petitioner in view of pendency of the Writ Petition.

(2.) As stated above, awards were passed on 9.5.2006. R.12(3) of the Land Acquisition (Kerala) Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') states that no award shall be passed unless the Land Acquisition Officer has sufficient funds at his disposal for making payment of compensation or depositing the same into the Treasury or the Court as the case may be. When an award is passed, the Land Acquisition Officer is expected to issue a notice to the awardee under S.12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. S.12(2) says that the Collector shall give immediate notice of his award to such of the persons interested as are not present personally or by their representatives, when the award is made. There is no case in the counter-affidavit that the petitioner was present when the award was made. Therefore, it is mandatory that the Collector should issue a notice under S.12(2) of the Act. R.13(1) of the Land Acquisition (Kerala) Rules provides for issue of a notice of award in Form No.10(b). Sub-rr.1 to 3 of Rule 13 are relevant, which read as follows:

(3.) A notice under Form No.10(b) gives the first opportunity to the awardee to approach the Land Acquisition Officer to receive the amount of compensation. If he does not receive the compensation as per that notice, the amount of compensation shall be paid into the Treasury as Revenue Deposit and the awardee would not be entitled to claim any interest. Therefore it is clear that the awardee must be given a notice under S.12(2) read with R.13(1) in Form No.10(b), if awardee was not present before the Collector at the time of making the award. In the case on hand, no such notice was issued at all. Instead, Exts.P-1 and P-2 notices dated 9.5.2006 were issued by the Land Acquisition Officer in Form No.11. Form No.11 notice is a notice to be issued under R.13(2) of the Rules. A notice under Form No.11 can be issued only in the contingencies mentioned in R.13(2). The Land Acquisition Officer is not entitled to deposit the amount in Treasury unless the requirements of R.13(2) are satisfied. Those requirements are: