The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs :
“i) to call for the records leading to Ext.P7, peruse the same and quash Ext.P7 notice;
ii) in the alternative, issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, Order, or Direction to the respondents to formulate, provide and discuss, mediate and negotiate with the petitioner with an acceptable rehabilitation scheme with compensatory amenities including payment of compensation in the event of acquisition considering the importance of place of the acquisition in compensation with the rehabilitated place;
iii) to appoint an advocate commissioner with a direction to inspect and report whether there is any vacant land available just near to the proposed Changampuzha park metro station;
And
iv) to grant such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case.”
2. A portion of an item of property owned by the petitioner at High School Junction, Edappally is proposed to be utilised for the construction of the Cochin Metro Rail Project. The Land Acquisition Officer has been obtaining the required extent of land by following the procedure of negotiated purchase. The District Level Purchase Committee negotiates with the land owners and arrives at the price for which the property could be purchased. The petitioner has W.P.(C) No.5055 of 2013 2 objections to the manner in which his property is proposed to be taken. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P9 which is a proposal to the 2nd respondent which is addressed to the 3rd respondent also. The petitioner complains that the said proposal has not been considered. At the same time, according to the petitioner, he is facing a threat of forcible dispossession of his property.
3. According to the learned Government Pleader who represents respondents 1 and 2, the property required for implementing the project is being acquired through the process of negotiated settlement and not by initiating land acquisition proceedings. The properties of various land owners have been acquired following the said procedure and compensation amounts have also been paid. Properties are being acquired ensuring that only minimum damage is caused while implementing the project. The same procedure would be adopted in the case of the petitioner also.
In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P9 proposal submitted by the petitioner, with notice to respondents 3 and 4 also as well as any other interested person. After considering the proposal, appropriate decision shall be taken, fixing the land value of the petitioner's property. A decision shall be taken in the matter in accordance with the above directions, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate W.P.(C) No.5055 of 2013 3 within a period of three weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV