Kerala High Court
Geetha.S.R vs State Of Kerala on 24 September, 2024
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
2024:KER:71123
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 2ND ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 21115 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
1 WAHABUDDIN
AGED 74 YEARS
KIZHAKKE POLIMOOTTIL' RESIDING AT CHANDRAGAD
P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT -
695 561
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
MR.SHIBU CHANDRAN NAIR, S/O CHANDRAN NAIR,
RESIDING AT CHANDRAGIRI, VENKAVILLA, IRINCHAYAM
P.O, NEDUMANGAD, TRIVANDRAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695561
2 AMIR.N.
AGED 71 YEARS
RESIDING AT ARF, EDAVA, EDAVA P.O, VARKALA TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN:- 695311
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MRS.
SHAFEEEKHA, D/O MUHAMMED KUNJU, RESIDING AT ARF,
EDAVA, EDAVA P.O., PIN - 695311
BY ADVS.
LIJU.V.STEPHEN
INDU SUSAN JACOB
ABHIJITH U.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
2
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT UNIT
PLANET KERALA, T.C. 8/1378 (8) SREE BABA LINE,
VALIYAVILA, THIRUMALA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695006
4 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF
KERALA LTD., 2ND FLOOR, PREETHI BUILDING, M.V.
ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI, PIN - 682025
5 THE SPECIAL THAHASILDAR
L.A. GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
6 KSCSTE-NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND
RESEARCH CENTRE
(AN INSTITUTION OF KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT),
K. KARUNAKARAN TRANSPARK, AKKULAM, THURUVIKKAL
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR, PIN - 695011
BY ADVS.
ASWIN V. NAIR(R3)
RESMITHA.R.CHANDRAN (SC)
DEEPA V, (GP)
RIJI RAJENDRAN, (SC, NATPAC)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 24.09.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).19439/2024, 25197/2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 2ND ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 19439 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
1 GEETHA.S.R
AGED 60 YEARS
D/O. G. RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT ROSE
GARDEN,VENKULAM, EDAVA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT . (SY.NOS. 240-3-1, 240-3, 240-2-3, 240-
16-1)., PIN - 695311
2 VENETIA RAJAN
AGED 64 YEARS
D/O. SAROJINI, AGED 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT PRAKASH
MANDIRAM, VENKULAM, EDAVA P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, NOW AT BLOCK NO. 109#04-166, BISHAN
STREET-12, SINGAPORE -570109,
REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
GEETHA.S.R., D/O. G. RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT ROSE
GARDEN,VENKULAM, EDAVA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT. (SY.NOS. 240-2-3, 240-16), PIN - 695311
3 SHABEELA DILEEP
AGED 51 YEARS
W/O. DILEEP, DARUL HUSSAIN, EDAVA.P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, (SY.NO.233-9), PIN -
695311
4 N.KANAKANGI VAMADEVAN
AGED 68 YEARS
W/O. VAMADEVAN, PAYATTUVILA HOUSE, VENKULAM,
EDAVA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
(SY.NO. 239-4), PIN - 695311
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
4
5 A.H. NIZAMUDDIN
AGED 75 YEARS
S/O ABDUL HAMEED, PUTHOORAM, EDAVA.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT (SY.NO. 524-7),
PIN - 695311
6 A. JALALUDHEEN
AGED 68 YEARS
S/O. ABDUL SALAM, NOORJALAL RESIDENCY, EDAVA.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
(SY.NO. 233- 9-1), PIN - 695311
BY ADVS.
LIJU.V.STEPHEN
INDU SUSAN JACOB
ABHIJITH U.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT UNIT
PLANET KERALA, T.C. 8-1378 (8) SREE BABA LINE,
VALIYAVILA, THIRUMALA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695006
4 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF
KERALA LTD., 2ND FLOOR, PREETHI BUILDING, M.V.
ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI, PIN - 682025
5 THE SPECIAL THAHASILDAR L.A GENERAL
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
5
6 KSCSTE-NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND
RESEARCH CENTRE
(AN INSTITUTION OF KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT), K.
KARUNAKARAN TRANSPARK, AKKULAM, THURUVIKKAL P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
PIN - 695011
BY ADVS.
ASWIN V. NAIR
RESMITHA.R.CHANDRAN (SC)
RIJI RAJENDRAN (SC NATPAC)
DEEPA V (GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 24.09.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).21115/2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 2ND ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 25197 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
FAZEELA HASHIM
AGED 63 YEARS
D/O ABDULSALAM, RESIDING AT HAYATH, EDAVA.P.O.,
EDAVA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
(SY.NOS.233/15, SUB DIVISION NO.31, AREA 6 ARE 60
SQM.), PIN - 695311
BY ADVS.
LIJU.V.STEPHEN
INDU SUSAN JACOB
TAJ K. TOM
ABHIJITH U.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
3 SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT UNIT
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, RPLANET KERALA, T.C.
8/1378 (8) SREE BABA LINE, VALIYAVILA,
THIRUMALA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695006
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
7
4 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF
KERALA LTD, 2ND FLOOR, PREETHI BUILDING,
M.V. ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI, PIN - 682025
5 THE SPECIAL THAHASILDAR L.A
GENERAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
6 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND RESEARCH
CENTRE
(AN INSTITUTION OF KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR
SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & ENVIRONMENT), K.
KARUNAKARAN TRANSPARK, AKKULAM, THURUVIKKAL P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
PIN - 695011
BY ADVS.
ASWIN V. NAIR
RESMITHA.R.CHANDRAN (SC)
RIJI RAJENDRAN (SC NATPAC)
DEEPA V (GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 24.09.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).21115/2024 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71123
WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
8
JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.21115/2024, 25197/2024 & 19439/2024] Dated this the 24th day of September, 2024 All the above three Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the proceedings of the acquisition of land for the construction of Railway Over Bridge at level crossing No.555 at Edava, in Thiruvananthapuram District along Paravur-Varkala road. In fact, this is a third round of litigation, challenging the acquisition.
2. The petitioners are residents of Edava village. When the acquisition proceedings were initiated, the petitioners approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.23560 of 2019, mainly with a prayer to quash Social Impact Assessment Study Report, relating to the acquisition of land for the construction of the above mentioned Over Bridge. There was also a prayer in the said Writ Petition to direct the respondents therein to 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
9 conduct a fresh Social Impact Assessment Study, after serving notice to the petitioners and all the affected persons in the locality. There was a further prayer to conduct a fresh study regarding the feasibility of the alternative routes suggested. The Writ Petition was disposed of, as per Ext.P6 judgment, directing the 2 nd respondent to take appropriate decision in the matter in terms of Section 15(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, 'RFCTLARR Act, 2013'), considering the objections given by the petitioners and others. Thereafter the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P7 order rejecting the contentions raised by the petitioners and recommending to proceed with land acquisition. Challenging Ext.P7 order, the petitioners and others preferred WP(C) No.28008 of 2020, before this Court. The main contention raised in that Writ Petition was that, while conducting Social Impact Assessment Study, in terms of Section 4 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, the feasibility of the 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
10 alternative route suggested was not considered. According to the petitioners, the alternative route suggested by them, is more feasible than the new proposal made. The alternative route suggested was over the existing road. It was pointed out that in the Social Impact Assessment Study Report, the feasibility of the alternative route was not considered at all. Taking note of the said contentions, this court, in WP(C) No.28008 of 2020, passed an order on 25.02.2021, directing NATPAC to depute a suitable team of efficient Scientists/Engineers having expertise in the design and construction of roads and bridges to inspect the proposed site for construction of the Railway Over Bridge at level crossing No.555 at Edava along Paravur- Varkala road and submit a report giving their opinion of the feasibility of option Nos.1 and 2 alignments. Accordingly, NATPAC conducted a feasibility study and filed a detailed report. The NATPAC has given a specific opinion regarding the proposed route as well as the alternative route, which has been described as option 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
11 Nos.1 and 2 alignments. This Court finally disposed of WP(C) No.28008 of 2020 as per Ext.P9 judgment, with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P8 report of the NATPAC and take a decision, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.R4(a), order, rejecting the alternative proposal made by the petitioners. Consequent to Ext.R4(a), the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P10 order recommending to proceed with the land acquisition proceedings. It is challenging Ext.P10, these Writ Petitions have been filed.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Liju V. Stephen, the learned Government Pleader, Smt.Deepa V and the learned Standing Counsel for the 4th respondent, Smt.Resmitha R. Chandran.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Ext.P10 was passed in violation of the directions of this Court in Ext.P9 judgment and Ext.P8 study report of NATPAC. The learned counsel further 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
12 submitted that, since Ext.P10 has been passed without complying the directions in Ext.P9 judgment and without getting the Social Impact Assessment Study Report, as suggested in Ext.P8, it is unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
5. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing counsel for the 4 th respondent submitted that Ext.P8 study report contains all the details regarding the original route as well as the alternative route and Ext.P10 order has been passed, after taking into consideration all the suggestions made in Ext.P8 study report, with regard to both options and also applying the directions in Ext.P9 judgment.
6. Section 4 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 deals with the preparation of the Social Impact Assessment Study. Sub-section (4)(e) of Section 4 says that Social Impact Assessment Study shall, amongst other matters, include whether land acquisition at an alternate place has been considered and found not feasible. Sub-rule (3)(d) of 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
13 Rule 7 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Social Impact Assessment and Consent) Rules, 2014 (for short, RFCTLARR Rules 2014') mandates that while conducting Social Impact Assessment Study, possible alternative sites for the project and their feasibility must be considered. Thus, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, while undertaking the Social Impact Assessment Study, the feasibility of the alternative sites suggested, must be taken note of. Ext.P3 is the Social Impact Assessment Study Report. It is true that in the said report, the feasibility of the alternative site was not taken into consideration at all. However, this Court in WP(C) No.19439 of 2024 deputed NATPAC to conduct the feasibility study of the alternative route and accordingly, NATPAC has submitted Ext.P8 study report. It was thereafter, Ext. R4(a) and Ext.P10 orders were passed.
7. A reading of Ext.R4(a) order would show that the District Collector has considered the suggestions made 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
14 by NATPAC in respect of both options, all contentions put forth by the petitioners and found that option No.2 alignment is more feasible. The District Collector has given valid reasons also for choosing option No.2 alignment, over option No.1 alignment, suggested by the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners relying on the recommendations made by NATPAC in Ext.P8 that a Social Impact Assessment Study has to be carried out regarding both options submitted that the District Collector ought not have opted option No.2 without conducting a further Social Impact Assessment Study. I cannot subscribe to the said submission. The NATPAC by studying the pros and cons of both options, made certain suggestions in Ext.P8 study report. The NATPAC has suggested certain modifications for both options and opined that both options should be studied in detail and Social Impact Assessment Study shall also be conducted on both the improved options.
2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
15
8. It is pertinent to note that the challenge against Ext.P3 is that it did not contain feasibility study of the alternative route. The NATPAC was directed to conduct feasibility study in respect of alternative route as well as the proposed route. The NATPAC after conducting a detailed study, furnished the relevant data regarding both routes. They also submitted the advantages and disadvantages of both options and made certain recommendations. The direction in Ext.P9 judgment to the 2nd respondent was to consider the report of NATPAC and to take a decision after hearing the petitioners. Ext.R4(a) order reveals that the District Collector has taken into account Ext.P8 study report, heard the petitioners and compared the feasibility of option Nos.1 and 2 alignments and came to the conclusion that option No.2 alignment is more feasible than option No.1. The order enumerates specific reasons for choosing option No.2 alignment and rejecting the claim of the petitioners. A comprehensive assessment, considering various aspects relating to land 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
16 acquisition, feasibility and social impact was conducted. The petitioners cannot dictate the way the alignment is to be fixed. It is settled that the Court can interfere with the acquisition of land only in the rarest of rare cases where it is found to be ex-facia contrary to the mandate of law or tainted due to malafides [Union of India (UOI) v. Dr. Kushala Shetty and Others (2011 KHC 821)]. The petitioners failed to establish a violation of the mandate of Act 2013 or any malafides on the part of the respondents. These writ petitions fail, and accordingly, they are dismissed.
Sd/-
Dr.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE JJ 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
17
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19439/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE BUDGET SPEECH (2014-2015) OF KERALA GOVERNMENT DATED 24.1.2014 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ALIGNMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ROB OVER THE EXISTING PWD ROAD PROPOSED BY THE ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY FINAL REPORT OF THE SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY REPORT OF EDAVA RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE DATED 26.4.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 23.11.2019 UNDER RULE 18(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AND OTHERS UNDER S.15(1) OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.1.2020 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.10.2020 IN WP©. NO. 23560/2019 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K3.49325/17 DATED 5.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
18 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE STUDY REPORT OF KSCSTE-NATPAC NO. NATPAC/98/2021-GA DATED 25-03-2021 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12-02- 2024 IN W.P.(C) NO. 28008/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit 10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13-05-2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R2(a) True copy of the report of the RBDCK to this respondent Exhibit R2(b) True copy of the proceedings No. K3/49325/17 dated 30-04-2024 of this respondent Exhibit-R3(a) The true copy of the GO (Ms) No. 94/2023/RD dated 30/04/2023 issued by the 1st respondent Exhibit-R3(b) The true Copy of the Notice No. 03/SIA/CK/2019 dated 07.02.2019 published by the chairman of the 3rd Respondent Exhibit-R3(c) The true copy of the news regarding the Public Hearing in Mathrubhumi Daily published on 09.02.2019 Exhibit R4(a) True copy of the e directions of WP( c) 28008/2020 order numbered K3.49325/2017 on 30.04.2024 Exhibit R4(b) True copy of the letter no W352/I/CN/ER/LC573 Issued by Southern Railway Kaniyapuram dated 20.09.2019 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
19
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25197/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE BUDGET SPEECH (2014-2015) OF KERALA GOVERNMENT DATED 24.1.2014 Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE ALIGNMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ROB OVER THE EXISTING PWD ROAD PROPOSED BY THE ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD. Exhibit P3 COPY FINAL REPORT OF THE SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY REPORT OF EDAVA RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE DATED 26.4.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 23.11.2019 UNDER RULE 18(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS UNDER S.15(1) OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT .DATED 21/1/2020 Exhibit P6 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.10.2020 IN WP©. NO. 23560/2019 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P7 COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K3.49325/17 DATED 5.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P8 COPY OF THE STUDY REPORT OF KSCSTE-
NATPAC NO. NATPAC/98/2021-GA DATED 25- 03-2021 Exhibit P9 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12-02-2024 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
20
IN W.P.(C) NO. 28008/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit P10 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13-05-2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P11 COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO. G.O. (RT) NO.4311/2017/RD DATED 11/10/2017 Exhibit P12 COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION NO.
K3-49325/17 DATED 14/08/2018 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit-R3(a) The true copy of the GO (Ms) No. 94/2023/RD dated 30/04/2023 issued by the 1st respondent Exhibit-R3(b) The true Copy of the Notice No. 03/SIA/CK/2019 dated 07.02.2019 published by the chairman of the 3rd Respondent Exhibit-R3(c) The true copy of the news regarding the Public Hearing in Mathrubhumi Daily published on 09.02.2019 Exhibit R4 (a) True copy of the order numbered K3.49325/2017 on 30.04.2024 Exhibit R4(b) True copy of the Southern Railway in its letter no. W352/ICN/ER/LC573 Kaniyapuram dated 20.09.2019 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
21
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21115/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE BUDGET SPEECH (2014-2015) OF KERALA GOVERNMENT DATED 24.1.2014 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ALIGNMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ROB OVER THE EXISTING PWD ROAD PROPOSED BY THE ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY FINAL REPORT OF THE SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY REPORT OF EDAVA RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE DATED 26.4.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 23.11.2019 UNDER RULE 18(1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AND OTHERS UNDER S.15(1) OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.1.2020 Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.10.2020 IN WP©. NO. 23560/2019 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.
K3.49325/17 DATED 5.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE STUDY REPORT OF KSCSTE-NATPAC NO. NATPAC/98/2021-GA 2024:KER:71123 WP(C) NO.21115/2024&Conn.
22
DATED 25-03-2021 Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12- 02-2024 IN W.P.(C) NO. 28008/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13-05- 2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.
G.O. (RT)NO.4311/217 DATED 11/10/2017 Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION NO. K.3-49325/17 DATED 14/08/2017 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE SECOND PETITIONER EXHIBIT R2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE RBDCK EXHIBIT R2(c) TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS No. K3/49325/17 DATED 30.04.2024 Exhibit-R3(a) The true copy of the GO (Ms) No. 94/2023/RD dated 30/04/2023 issued by the 1st respondent Exhibit-R3(b) The true Copy of the Notice No. 03/SIA/CK/2019 dated 07.02.2019 published by the chairman of the 3rd Respondent Exhibit-R3(c) The true copy of the news regarding the Public Hearing in Mathrubhumi Daily published on 09.02.2019 Exhibit R4(a) True copy of the order numbered K3.49325/2017 on 30.04.2024 Exhibit R4(b) True copy of the Southern railway in its letter no W352/I/CN/ER/LC573 Kaniyapuram dated 20.09.2019