Valambath Narayani Amma vs The Spl. Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)

K. Padmanabhan Nair, J.—The main relief sought for in all these writ petitions is for a direction to the first respondent, Special Tahsildar, to refer the applications filed by the petitioners u/s 28A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, (for short ''the Act'') to the Subordinate Judge''s Court for re-determining the compensation.

The land owned by the petitioners in all these cases were acquired for the purpose of establishing Naval Academy, at Ezhimala in Kannur District. In some cases, claimants did not file petitions u/s 18 of the Act. But some other persons whose lands were acquired for the very same purpose filed petitions u/s 18(1) of the Act and those cases were referred to the Sub Court. The learned Sub Judge enhanced the compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Thereafter, petitioners filed Section 28A applications for re-determining the compensation, on the ground that the court awarded enhancement of compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. Those applications were dismissed. Subsequent to the disposal of Section 28A applications, petitioners had filed applications u/s 28A(3) of the Act, which are marked as Exts.P5 series in W.P.(C) No. 34818/2007; Ext.P4 series in W.P.(C) No. 35493/2007; Ext.P6 in W.P.(C) No. 36224/2007 and W.P.(C) No. 266/2008, for referring the matter to Court to consider the claim of the petitioners that they are entitled to re-determine the compensation due to them. In all these writ petitions, it is averred that there is undue relay in referring the matter.

In W.P.(C) No. 34593/2007, this Court, on 14-12-2007, suo motu impleaded the Chief Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram, and the Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, as additional respondents. They were directed to look into the matter personally and the statements/affidavit explaining as to what action they propose to take in the mater. It was also ordered that if they fail to take proper action, this Court will be constrained to take stringent action including restraining the State from proceeding with further land acquisition proceedings, until the amounts due to the persons whose lands were already acquired are paid.

The Additional Land Revenue Commissioner had filed a counter affidavit for and on behalf of the Additional 3rd and 4th respondents, in which it was stated that strict instructions/directions were issued to the office of the District Collector, Kannur, on 27-11 -2007, and pursuant to that direction, the District Collector, Kannur, has finalised the action plan for the time bound disposal of applications filed u/s 28A(3) of the Act. It was also averred that District Collector, Kannur, had issued orders on 22-12-2007 authorising the Deputy Collector (LA), Kannur, and Senior Superintendent, Suit Cell, Collectorate Kannur to review the work done by the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition (Naval Academy), Payyannur, every day and to furnish details of progress achieved to the District Collector, Kannur. It is also stated that instructions were issued to the Special Tahsildar, LA, Ezhimala Naval Academy, Payyannur. He had also furnished the details of applications filed u/s 28A(3) applications from the year 1995 till 2007, which were disposed of and pending as on 31-12-2007, which is as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------- SL Year No. of. No. of Balance No. applications applications received referred to the Court ----------------------------------------------------------- 1 1995 1 1 - 2 1996 0 0 - 3 1997 5l 51 - 4 1998 81 81 - 5 1999 76 76 - 6 2000 32 32 - 7 2001 104 57 47 8 2002 8 2 6 9 2003 0 0 - 10 2004 1 0 1 11 2005 65 0 65 12 2006 105 0 105 13 2007 30 0 30 ----------------------------------------------------------- Total 554 300 254 -----------------------------------------------------------

It is also stated that an area of 955.1391 Hectares of land in Ramanthali Village of Taliparamba Taluk was acquired, in addition to 73.2477 Hectares of puramboke land which was transferred for establishing Naval Academy at Ezhimala about 23 years back. It is further stated that soon after the acquisition of land, all the six special LA units functioning were abolished and the filed and records were handed over to the Special Tahsilrar, LA, Thalassery. Those filed were handed over to Special Tahsildar (LA) Kannur, in the year 1992. That office was abolished with effect from 30-4-2002 and the filed and records were again handed over to the Special Tahsildar, LA, Thalassery. It is averred that a Special Land Acquisition unit at Payyannur was created in the year 2005 of dealing with Sections 28A and 28A(3) applications and the unit is still functioning. It is averred that application filed in W.P.(C) No. 35493/2008 was referred to the Sub Court, Payyannur, on 29-12-2007.

The District Collector, Kannur filed a statement showing the probable time which he would require to deal with all pending applications filed under Sections 28A and 28A(3) of the Act. He had reported that a Special Land Acquisition Unit at Payyannur was created with effect from 7-2-2005. He had also given the details of applications received under Sections 28A and 28A(3) of the Act, and also the number of LAR cases and EP cases, which is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applications Applications LAR EP filed Under filed Under cases cases Section 28A Section 28A(3) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applications Transferred from the O/o. Spl. Tahsildar (LA) Thalassery 1364 354 261 94 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applications received after the creation of O/o. Spl. Tahsildar (LA) Naval Academy, Payyannur 970 200 152 28 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total 2334 554 413 122 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applications disposed after the creation of O/o. Spl. Tahsildar (LA) Naval Academy, Payyannur 559 457 18 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applications pending to be disposed off (as on 31/1/2008) 1775 97 395 106 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is further stated that Special Tahsildar had reported that out of 260 numbers of Section 28A(3) applications pending before that office, as on 31-1-2008, 150 numbers of applications were referred to the court and 33 numbers of applications are duplicates. It is further stated that 69 numbers of applications could not be referred to the court for want of required documents such as power of attorney, legal heir certificate etc. It is further averred that no orders could be passed in 28 number of applications, as the connected LA files could not be traced out. It is also stated that strict instructions were given to the Special Tahsildar to trace out the files and dispose of all those applications immediately. It is further stated that Special Tahsildar (LA), Naval Academy, has reported that 1775 numbers of applications filed u/s 28A are still pending and those applications can be disposed of only within a period of 7 years, with the existing staff and facilities now available.

(emphasis supplied)

It is also stated that to dispose of Section 28A applications under the Act, the following procedure is to be followed:

Verification of the eligibility of applications by the Section Clerk.

Authorise the SRI for conducting enquiry such as verification of the field (ie and mentioned in the LAR and land acquired from the applicant in eligible case)

Submission of report by SRI after verification and over checking by the Valuation Asst.

Verification of the report and filed by the LAO.

To issue notice of enquiry to the applicant and conduct enquiry by LAO.

Preparation of award and submit to the Dist. Collector for approval by the LAO.

Verification and approval of award by the Collector and return

Making payment after giving notice to the applicant by the LAO.

Further, it is averred that only 559 numbers of 28A applications were disposed of since the formation of the new unit on 7-2-2005 and hence it is not possible to propose a cut off date for disposing of pending 1775 applications in the near future or within six months with the existing staff strength.

(emphasis supplied).

It is also stated that in addition to the works relating to dispose of Sections 28A and 28A(3) applications, he office of the Special Tahsildar is handling two LA works related to the improvement of roads leading to Naval Academy Project, LAR cases and EP cases etc. It was also stated that for speedy disposal of the above applications, in addition to 11 additional staff strength, infrastructural facilities such as computers, printers, photocopier and jeeps are also required. Hence, the Collector had reported that though the Tahsildar has sought for 7 years time to dispose of the pending applications, these applications can be disposed of within two years, provided the additional staffs and infrastructure facilities as proposed are obtained.

(emphasis supplied).

Since the facts in other cases are similar, it is not necessary to discuss the facts of other cases. It is true that subsequent to the filing of these writ petitions, cases were referred to the Civil Court. So, in a way, it can be said that petitioners have got the relief they sought for. But the fact remains that a large number of writ petitions are filed for directions to the Land Acquisition Officers to discharge their statutory duties cast upon them. It is not confined to the acquisition for Naval Academy. There are other projects like Kallada Irrigation Project and Moovattupuzha Vally Irrigation Project etc. A large of number of land owners whose lands were acquired long back are compelled to spend huge amounts by filing writ petitions. When very old applications are pending, applications, filed long thereafter are being disposed, after getting orders from this Court. It is seen that unless this Court interferes, the Land Acquisition Officers will not pass orders. Though there are specific provisions in the Act and Rules, those provisions are never followed. So, I am of the considered opinion that it is high time that some specific directions are to be issued in the matter of disposal of the applications.

In view of the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition Act, a person whose lande is acquired for a public purose, is entitled to get 12% interest per annum on the market value for the period commencing on and from the date of publication of notification u/s 4(1) of the Act, till the date on which award is passed or taking possession of land, whichever is earlier. He is also entitled to get 30% solatium. In addition to those amounts, the claimant is entitled to get interest u/s 34 of the Act. For the first year, it is 9%. If the compensation is not paid with a period of one year from the date of taking possession, the claimant is entitled to get interest at the rate of 15% per annum, and the same is payable from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on the amount of compensation or part thereof which has not been paid or deposited before the date of such expiry. So, if the amounts due are not paid within the statutory period, the liability is cast upon the State to pay interest, at the rate of 15% per annum, from the second year onwards. In all these cases, land was acquired prior to 1983. Award notice was issued on 5-3-1984. So, necessarily, in all these cases, huge amounts are to be paid to the claimants as interest. I do not think the State have ever considered the amount which is being paid by way of interest every year in Land Acquisition Case. It is an indisputed fact that amounts awarded by the Subordinate Judges'' Courts and the enhancement allowed are never deposited in time. I have absolutely no doubt in mind, if the actual amount paid as interest in every year is calculated, it will run into crores of rupees. In O.P. No. 31502/2000, the compensation due to the petitioners was re-determined and fixed at Rs. 25,94,363/-, and the State paid an amount of Rs. 83,88,074/- to the claimants, after deducting the Income Tax. The Revenue Divisional Officer had filed statement admitting that interest due to the petitioners in that case alone come to Rs. 63,43,324/-. If a person whose land is acquired got the reasonable compensation without delay, he can invest that money. If the amount is paid after 20 years, as done in O.P. No. 31502/2000, both sides are not benefited. The money value will go down. The person whose property is acquired will not be in a position to invest the money profitably. The State will have to spend huge amount by way of interest. Such money could have been utilised for some developmental projects. Huge loss is caused to the State on account of negligence and inaction on the part of the Land Acquisition Officers. Unfortunately, District Collectors and the Land Revenue Commissioner are not taking any steps to tackle this problem.

In the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No. 34593/2007, it is stated that immediately after the acquisition, the office of the Land Acquisition will be abolished. In this case, it was averred that six Special Land Acquisition units were created for the purose of acquisition. Immediately after the acquisition process was over, all those units were abolished. The filed were dumped in the office of Special Tahsildar (LA) Thalassery, who in turn transferred the same to Special Tahsildar (LA) Kannur. On 30-4-2002, those files were handed over to Special Tahsildar (LA), Thalassery. In the year 2005, a Land Acquisition unit at Payyannur was created. A reading of the counter affidavit is closed, the files will be dumped in some other office. There is nothing on record to show that there is a practice of any proper handing over of taking charge of those files. As and when petitions under Sections 18, 28A or 28A(3) are filed, the officer of the Land Acquisition Office in which the filed are dumped is called upon to decide the matter. No additional staffs are provided and that office has to consider and dispose of the applications along with the ordinary work of that office. I do not think it is proper to issue a direction to the Government to retain all the Land Acquisition Offices until all applications filed u/s 18, 28A and 28A(3) are disposed of. But I am of the considered opinion that the Land Acquisition Offices must be allowed to continued to function for a reasonable time, so as to enable the claimants to file applications u/s 18. If the offices are abolished all of a sudden, affected parties may not be in a position to find out the new officer before whom they have to file applications u/s 18 of the Act. So, there will be a direction to the Government not to abolish the Land Acquisition offices, at least for a period of six months, after passing of the award.

The District Collector has stated that 28 numbers of applications could not be disposed of, as the connected LA filed are missing. According to me, the Land Acquisition Officer cannot be allowed to raise such an objection at al, in view of the provisions contained in the Rules.

Rule 16A of the Rules deals with the filing of the applications. It provides that they application u/s 18 and Section 28A(3) of the Act shall be made in Form No. 22A, in triplicate, and shall be filed within the time limit prescribed for that purpose. As'' son as the applications are received, the Land Acquisition Officer shall make necessary entries in the Register in Form Nos. 21 and 23. One copy of the application shall be returned to the applicant duly acknowledging its receipt with the officer seal and dated signature of the Land Acquisition Officer, immediately on receipt. The other copies shall be used for reference to Court and for office records. So, a statutory duty is cast upon the Land Acquisition Officer to comply with the Rules. If the application filed is not in accordance with Rule 16A of the Rules, the application shall be returned to the applicant for curing the defect and for filing the same within a time limit fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. If the application is re-presented within the time granted, it shall be treated as an application filed on the date of original filing.

Rule 18 of the Rules deals with Maintenance of Registers. Rule 18(d) provides that the Land Acquisition Officer shall maintain a Register containing the claims made by the interested parties in Form No. 22. Rule 18(f) deals with the register of applications for re-determination of compensation u/s 28A filed by persons interested in Form No. 10(aa). Model forms, as well as the model of Registers are given in the Rules itself. Form No. 19 provides a Special Register for Land Acquisition cases. Form No. 20 deals with the Award Register. Form No. 21 deals with the registration of land acquisition suits. Form No. 22 deals with the register for claims made by parties. Form No. 22A deals register for applications of reference. Form No. 23 also deals with Register of reference applications. In view of the statutory provisions, the Land Acquisition Officer has no choice, but to maintain all these registers in proper form.

Rule 12A of the Rules deals with the re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court. Rule 12A of the Rules reads as follows:

12A.Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court - (i) On receipt of an application u/s 28A from the persons interested within the stipulated period, the Collector shall conduct an enquiry after due notice all the persons interested and after giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, make an award re-determining the compensation payable to each applicant. The value of each sub-division shall be decided upon by the Collector, the applicability of the award of the Court and the rate of compensation to be awarded on re-determination have to be adjudicate, upon by the Collector taking into consideration all relevant acts and circumstances. Every award u/s 28A shall be supported by a note to award giving justification in passing such award.

(ii) The re-determined compensation shall not be less than the compensation originally awarded or shall not be more than the amount awarded by the Court. It shall not be more than the compensation originally claimed by the landowner.

(iii) Every award u/s 28A shall be in Form No. 10(C).

(iv) Every award u/s 28A shall be got approved by the competent Authority subject to the monetary limit prescribed under Clauses (a) to (c) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 12.

(v) No application u/s 28A shall be entertained when a land acquisition appeal case is pending before a Court.

(vi) xxxxx

(vii) A register in Form No. 10(aa) showing the details of applications u/s 28A shall be maintained by the Collector.

A reading of Rule 12A of the Rules makes it clear that applications filed under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) shall be the prescribed form and it shall be in triplicate. On receipt of the same, the Land Acquisition Officer shall make necessary entries in the register which is kept in Form Nos. 21 and 22. When the Collector passes an award u/s 28A, it shall be in Form No. 10(c). If further says that a Register in form No. 10(aa) showing the details of applications of 28A shall be maintained by the Collector.

Rule 11 of the Rules provides that notice shall be issued to persons interested in the land. In U.P Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Gyan Devi (Dead) by L.Rs. and another, etc. etc., , the Apex Court had held that Department/Company/local authority for whose need the land is acquired is also a person interested in the land. The Apex Court had also laid down the following directions in the matter.

Section 50(2) of the L.A. Act confers on a local authority for whom land is being acquired a right to appear in the acquisition proceedings before the Collector and the reference Court and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation.

The said right carried with it the right to be given adequate notice by the Collector as well as the reference Court before whom acquisition proceedings are pending of the date on which the matter of determination of compensation will be taken up.

The proviso to Section 50(2) only precludes a local authority from seeking a reference but it does not deprive the local authority which feels aggrieved by the determination of the amount of compensation by the Collector or by the reference Court to invoke the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution as well as the remedies available under the L.A. Act.

In the event of denial of the right conferred by Section 50(2) on account of failure of the Collector to serve notice of the acquisition proceedings the local authority can invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Even when notice has been served on the local authority the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution would be available to the local authority on grounds on which judicial review is permissible under Article 226.

The local authority is a proper party in the proceedings before the reference Court and is entitled to be impleaded as a party in those proceedings wherein it can defend the determination of the amount of compensation by the Collector and Oppose enhancement of the said amount and also adduce evidence in that regard.

In the event of enhancement of the amount of compensation by the reference Court if the Government does not file an appeal the local authority can file an appeal against the award in the High Court after obtaining leave of the Court.

In an appeal by the person having an interest in land seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the reference Court, the local authority should be impleaded as a party and is entitled to be served notice of the said appeal. This would apply to an appeal in the High court as well as in this Court.

Since a company for whom land is being acquired has the samd right as a local authority u/s 50(2), whatever has been said with regard to a local authority would apply to a company too.

The matters which stand finally concluded will, however, not be reopened.

In fact, even if the acquisition is for a Government Department, the amount necessary for payment of compensation is to be provided by that Department. At present, there is no provision in the Statute or Rules which enjoin that notice shall be given to the Department/Corporation/Company, which is the requisitioning authority. If the matter is referred to the Court u/s 18 of the Act, it may take some time for a decision. On the strength of that decision, if any person files an application u/s 28A of the Act, it is the duty of the Department/Company/Corporation to provide necessary funds. So, in order to give an information to the requisitioning authority and also to enable it adduce evidence to the Court/authority to fix fair compensation, it is only just and proper that the requisitioning authority also be given notice of all proceedings, starting from the notification u/s 4(1) of the Act itself. Notice shall be given to the requisitioning authority at the award enquiry stage. Notice of award shall also be served on it. The requisitioning authority shall be made a party to the award. If the matter is referred to the Court, the requisitioning authority will also get an opportunity to adduce evidence and automatically become a party to the proceedings in the Court. Like wise, the Land Acquisition Officer shall insist that a person who filed an application for enhancement u/s 18 of the Act, or for determination u/s 28A of the Act, or for referring the matter to re-determine the compensation u/s 28A(3) of the Act, shall make the requisitioning authority also, be it a Government Department/local authority/Compensation etc., a party to those applications. The Land Acquisition Officer shall issue notice of petitions filed under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) to the requisitioning authority before taking any decision.

Rule 16 of the Land Acquisition (Kerala) Rules, 1990, (for short the ''the Rules'') prescribes the time limit for referring the matter under Sections 18, 28A(3) and 30 of the Act. It reads as follows:

Reference to Court - Reference to Court u/s 18 or Sub-section (3) of Section 28A or Section 30 of the Act shall be made by the Land Acquisition Officer in form No. 15 supported by information in the prescribed schedule in Form Nos. 16 and 17.

Provided that in the case of applications presented to the Land Acquisition Officer for reference to Court it shall be referred within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the application.

The Rules prescribe a time limit within which an application filed under Sections 18, 28A(3) and 30 is to be disposed of. Such applications are to be disposed of within six months from the date of receipt of the application. There is absolutely no justification in causing delay in disposing of the application filed under Sections 18, 28A(3) and 30 of the Act.

Proviso to Rule 16 of the Rules provides that an application for reference shall be heard and disposed of within six months from the date of receipt of the application. But no such time limit is prescribed u/s 28A for re-determining the compensation on the basis of the award of the Court. Considering all aspects of the matter, I am of the view that such applications shall be disposed of within one year from the date of its receipt. Of course, I am not forgetting the fact that in some of the cases, there will be large number applications, as in the case of Naval Academy. When large extent of land is acquired under one notification, for the purpose of establishing an Airport or for such other projects, a large number of applications may be filed. In such cases, it may not be possible for the staff of the office to which files are transferred after acquisition to dispose of all the applications within the limit fixed. As I have already stated, the present practice is to abolish the land acquisition office immediately after the acquisition process is over and transmit the files to another office. The staff attached to that office will have to consider and dispose of the applications filed under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) and 30 of the Act also, in addition to their normal duties. So, when large number of applications under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) of the Act are to be considered in respect of one acquisition, it is only just and proper that the Government shall provide sufficient number of additional staff and infrastructure facilities, if necessary, by deploying staff attached to other units, to deal with the applications. There is absolutely no justification in delaying disposal of the applications filed under Sections 18 or 28A(3) of the Act, beyond the time limit of six months and in the case of Section 28A applications, beyond a period of one year. If any Land Acquisition Officer unnecessarily delays the matter without any reason beyond the time limit prescribed under Rule 16 of the Rules, in the case of Sections 18 and 28A(3) applications, and beyond the period of one year, in the case of Section 28A applications, he shall be made personally liable for the interest beyond the period of time limit. Further, his action will amount to willful flouting of this judgment. Of course, if there is sufficient or valid reasons, he may postpone the disposal of the applications, but after reasons, he may postpone the disposal of the applications, but after recording the reasons. I am also aware of the fact that while re-determining the compensation u/s 28 of the Act, draft award is to be approved by the District Collector and in some of other cases by the Land Revenue Commissioner. The District Collector shall consider and pass final orders in such cases within six months from the date of receipt of the same. In some cases that it may not possible to dispose of Section 28A application because of the pendency of appeal, as Rule 12A(5) of the Rules provides that no application u/s 28A shall be entertained when a land acquisition appeal case is pending before a Court. In such cases, the Land Acquisition Officer shall record the reason in the case bundle, as well as in the Register and await the disposal of the appeal. He shall make every effort to ascertain the date of disposal of the appeal periodically. The District Collector concerned shall conduct inspection of the office of the Land Acquisition Officer periodically.

In the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No. 35493/2007, however, it is stated that when the acquisition process is over, the office will be abolished and filed will be transferred to another office. The District Collector has reported that the files relating to applications could not be traced out. If a Land Acquisition Officer is transferred, he shall hand over each and every filed relating to Land Acquisition cases and registers to his successor in office under proper acknowledgement. Pages of each file shall be numbered and indexed. A detailed report of all filed shall be stated in the report of handing over charge. The correctness of the same shall be verified by the officer taking charge. If an officer fails to do so, he shall be made personally liable for the interest which accrues. The officer who takes charge shall verify whether any file relating to petitions filed under Sections 18, 28A or 28A(3) applications are pending unnecessarily, and if any such case is noted, he shall immediately report the matter to the District Collector and also the Land Revenue Commissioner, who shall take appropriate action against the Land Acquisition Officer, who failed to take timely action.

If an officer is abolished, filed relating to Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) applications shall be separately indexed, pages numbered and handed over to the officer, and the officer in-charge of the new office shall physically verify and take charge of those filed and registers. Necessary entries shall be made in the handing over charge regarding these aspects.

In some cases, like the one at hand, when large area may be acquired under the same notification, some of the claimants may file applications u/s 18. In such cases, the entire filed may be handed over to the Government Pleader or to the concerned Advocate General for defending the case. In such cases, files shall be handed over to the Government Pleader only under proper acknowledgment. Necessary entries shall be made in the Register. As and when a file is received back, that fact also shall be noted in the Register. In short, no Land Acquisition Officer will be allowed to raise a contention that file is missing or could not be traced out. A statutory duty is cast upon the Land Acquisition Officer to hear and dispose of the applications filed under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) of the Act. It is quasi judicial function to be discharged by that officer. It is the duty of the Land Acquisition Officer who is in charge of the office to see that all the files relating to acquisition are properly indexed and entered in the register, and in those cases which are given either to the Advocate General''s office or to the Government Pleader''s office, proper entries are made in the register.

Rule 18 of the Rules deals with maintenance of Registers. All officers dealing with land acquisition work is bound to maintain six Registers prescribed under Rule 18 of the Rules.

It is seen that large number of Land Acquisition Officers are not properly maintaining these Registers, though a statutory duty is cast on them, to maintain those registers prescribed under the Rules. So, there will be a direction to the all Land Acquisition Officers in the State to maintain such registers, with effect from 1 -9-2008, if no such registers are not maintained at present. There are cases in which registers are being maintained, but those registers do not contain the necessary entries. It is not sufficient that registers are maintained, but all the columns in the register shall be promtly filled up. If sufficient number of registers are not available, the State shall print and supply necessary registers provided under Rule 18 of the Rules, before 1-9-2008. If no printed registers are available, the Land Acquisition Officers shall use the other registers after writing necessary entries as provided under the Rules.

According to the District Collector, Kannur, the Special Tahsildar had reported that it will take seven years disposing 1728 pending applications. The reasons stated for seven years'' time is not at all satisfactory, there is absolutely no justification in giving seven more years for finishing the pending work. If the staff attached to Land Acquisition Office are unable to do the work, it is the duty of the Government to find out staff who are able to do the work. The work shall be done strictly in accordance with the seniority of the applications filed. It is the duty of the Government to provide additional staff and infrastructure facilities and see that all pending applications filed under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) of the Act are disposed of on or before 31-5-2009.1 make it clear that this direction is not only in respect of the acquisition of land for Naval Academy, but it applies to each and every land acquisition office in this State, including Kallada Irrigation Project and Moovattupuzha vally Irrigation Project etc. I make it clear that if any application already filed and pending as on today, are not disposed of within 31 -5-2009, without any valid reasons, the State shall not issue any notification u/s 4(1) of the Act for acquisition of land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act for any pubic purpose. It shall no proceed with the acquisition proceedings, in which notification u/s 4(1) of the Act were already issued. The State can issue any fresh notifications or continue the proceedings only after clearing all applications pending as on today.

In the result, the writ petitions are disposed of in the following manner.

1) In all proceedings for acquisition of land, the Land Acquisition Officer shall issue notice of the notification u/s 4(1), declaration u/s 6(1), award enquiry notice u/s 9(3) and notice of award u/s 12(2) of the Act to the requisitioning authority, whether it be a Government Department/local authority/Corporation/Company. The requisitioning authority shall be made a party to the award. Any person who files petitions under Sections 18, 28A(3) of the Act, shall make the requisitioning authority also a respondent in the petition. The Land Acquisition Officer shall issue notice to the requisitioning authority also before taking a decision in such applications, so that, the Government Department/Local Authority/Corporation/Company will get sufficient notice to raise necessary funds to pay the enhanced compensation and can lead evidence to help the Court/authority to fix the fair compensation.

2) All applications filed under Sections 18, 28A and 28A(3) of the Act, pending as on today, shall be disposed of, on or before 31-5-2009. If all the applications pending as on this date is not disposed of, before 31-5-2009, thereafter, the State shall not issue any notification u/s 4(1) of the Act or continue the proceedings already initiated, until and unless all such applications, except the applications which are to be kept pending, are disposed of.

3) From 1-9-2008 onwards, the Land Acquisition Officers shall insist that applications filed under Sections 18 and 28A(3) of the act shall be in Form No. 22A, supported by the information''s prescribed by the Schedules in form Nos. 16 and 17. Those applications shall be filed in triplicate. Immediately on receipt of such applications, one copy shall be returned to the applicant duly acknowledging its receipt with officer seal and dated signature of the acquisition officer. In case, any application filed is not in the prescribed form, the said shall be returned to the applicant with a direction to cure the defect and re-submit the same in the prescribed form, within a period fixed by the officer from the date of return. If defects are cured and applications re-presented within the period so fixed, that applications shall be treated as one filed on the date on which it was presented for the first time.

4) All Land Acquisition Officers shall maintain all the six Registers prescribed under Rule 18 of the Rules with effect from 1-9-2008 onwards.

5) All applications filed under Sections 18 and 28A(3) of the Act shall be dispoded of within a period of six months as provided under the proviso to Rule 16 of the Rules.

6) An applications filed u/s 28A of the Act shall be dispoded of within one year from the date of receipt of the application.

7) On receipt of reference applications, the Land Acquisition Officer shall make necessary entries in the Registers provided for that purpose. If, for any valid reason, Land Acquisition Officer is not about to dispose of the applications within the time, that reason shall be recorded in the case bundle itself. All draft awards for the District Collector/Land Revenue Commissioner shall be considered and appropriate orders passed within three months from the date of receipt of draft award. If the delay is caused without any reason, the persons who are responsible for the delay shall be made personally liable.

8) In case any Land Acquisition Officer fails to take a decision within the time limit prescribed in this judgment, and also under the Rule, he/she will be personally for the interest which accrues beyond that time limit. Whenever, an officer is transferred or the office is abolished, all files relating to that land acquisition shall be properly indexed, pages numbered shall be handed over to the successor in office under proper acknowledgment. The officer who akes charge shall verify and take charge of each bundle. If the officer who takes charge finds any unexplained delay in disposing of the case, he shall immediately report the matter to the Land Revenue Commissioner through the District Collector, who shall, take appropriate action against the officer who was responsible for the delay.

9) The District Collector concerned shall conduct periodical inspection preferably once in every year in the office of the Land Acquisition Officers, to verify whether the Land Acquisition Officers are following the statutory requirements and take appropriate action.

In case, a large number of applications are filed in respect of the acquisition under one notification for a public purpose, the Government shall provide necessary additional staff and infrastructure to deal with such applications. The Government shall also print necessary registers and supply them, if already not supplied, to every Land Acquisition Officer in the State on or before 1-9-2008.

There will be a direction to the Registrar to communicate a copy of this judgment to the Chief Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram, and also the Land Revenue Commissioner with a direction to communicate the same to each and every District Collector and Land Acquisition Officer in the State under proper acknowledgment for strict compliance of the directions contained in the judgment.

The writ petitions are disposed of in the above terms.