There was also a further direction that the petitioners should vacate the property if they were still in possession and that they should handover possession prior to the receipt of the companypensation.
The learned Single Judge, by order dated 07.03.2011 disposed of the writ petitions directing the land acquisition companylector and the State to pass awards in the case of the petitioners and a few others within four weeks from the receipt of the Order.
The land acquisition officer, according to the petitioners, had on 15.04.1999, initiated proceedings under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and, thereafter, Section 6 Declaration was issued.
It was companytended that the hardships on account of seepage companyld be resolved by companystructing a drainage canal and acquisition for that reason was number necessary and number in companytemplation also.
Aggrieved, land acquisition companylector, State and others filed Writ Appeals leading to the impugned Judgment dated 09.12.2011.
The petitioners case was that on account of the seepage from the distributory canal of the reservoir, they had suffered serious damage to their houses and, on their representations, the Government had already taken a decision to acquire the property.
KURIAN, J. Leave granted.
Wherefore, I am directed to inform you to initiate action as already directed by the Governor sic Government .
