ROSY AUGUSTINE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have approached this Court challenging the land acquisition proceedings initiated pursuant to the notification No. A2.744/92 of the 4th respondent and seeking a further direction restraining the respondents from taking any action pursuant to the said notification including dispossession of the petitioners from the shop rooms occupied by them. A declaration is also sought for to the effect that "the notification containing proposed acquisition published in the Kerala Gazette on 8.5.95 is hit by the proviso to S.6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1994 and therefore, the said notification and all the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto are nonest and unsustainable in law.

(2.) Thus the case of the petitioners is that the land acquisition proceedings cannot be proceeded with as it had elapsed in terms of the proviso to S.6 of the Act. The proviso to S.6 reads as follows: "Provided that no declaration in respect of any particular land covered by a notification under S.4, sub-s. (1), -

(3.) S.6(2) provides that every declaration shall be published in the Official Gazette and in two daily news papers circulating in the locality in which the land is situated and the Collector shall cause public notice of the substance of such declaration to be given at convenient place in the said locality. It is also provided in that sub-section that, "the 4ast of the dates of such publication and giving of such public notice being hereinafter referred to as the date of publication of the declaration". The last among the date of publication of S.6 declaration pointed out by the petitioners is 31.7.95. The petitioners cite this date on the strength of Ext. P5 award. It is mentioned in the award that publication of S.6 declaration was made in the locality "dated 31.7.95". Therefore, it is made after one year from Ext. P1, the petitioners submit.