SULAIMAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayers sought in this writ petition are to quash Ext. P1 notification issued under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and require respondents 1 to 3 not to acquire or take possession of land in Sy. No.1/8 of Thekkumbhagam Village, Kanayannur Taluk owned by the petitioners. Petitioners own 0.2307 hectors (56.98 cents) of land. By Ext. P1, notification issued under S.4(1) of the Lard Acquisition Act, the land is sought to be acquired for the purpose of handing it over to the 6th respondent in exchange of the land acquired from them.

(2.) Facts of the case are that, in order to widen the access road to a bridge that was proposed to be constructed across the Thattapillikattu river, part of the land belonging to the 6th respondent was proposed to be acquired and Ext. P2 notification under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 05/05/2004. The 6th respondent challenged the acquisition proceedings by filing WP (C) No. 21716/2005 before this Court. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext. P4 judgment dated 07/11/2005 quashing Ext. P2 notification and the declaration under S.6 of the Act, with liberty to the respondents to issue a fresh notification.

(3.) Accordingly, a fresh notification under S.4(1) was issued on 09/06/2006. That notification was again challenged by the 6th respondent by filing WP (C) No. 18503/2006, a copy of which is Ext. P3. Ext. P10 is the counter - affidavit filed by the respondents. Subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the 6th respondent got the writ petition amended and contended that the school was a linguistic minority educational institution and therefore in view of the Apex Court judgment in Society of St. Joseph's College v. Union of India, 2002 KHC 95 : 2002 (1) KLT 438 : 2002 (1) SCC 273 : AIR 2002 SC 195, the acquisition proceedings are illegal. Ext. P6 is the counter - affidavit filed by the State disputing the minority status claimed by the 6th respondent. It would appear that during the pendency of the writ petition, realizing the difficulty in acquiring the land of the 6th respondent in the light of the Apex Court judgment relied on by them, it was decided by the respondents to arrive at a consensus on the issue. Accordingly a consensus was arrived at and Exts. P7 and P8 statements were filed before this Court. In Ext. P7 statement it was stated that, the acquisition proceedings were initiated to acquire an extent of 15.58 ares of property of the 6th respondent and that the respondents were willing to acquire and hand over to the 6th respondent, an equal extent of property, on the western side of the compound wall of the school, situated in Sy No. 1.8 of Thekkumbhagam Village, if the 6th respondent surrenders 15.58 ares of property situated in Sy. No. 1/21 and 1/23 of Thekkumbhagam Village. It was further stated that if the 6th respondent was amenable to the above suggestion, the respondents were ready to proceed with the acquisition invoking S.17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and compensate the 6th respondent. Ext. P8 is a further statement incorporating more details of the proposal referred to above.