Vijayan M K v. The Cochin International Airport Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/19TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 16235 of 2015 (D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

--------------------- VIJAYAN M.K., AGED 56 YEARS S/O. LATE KUTTAPPAN, MOOTHEDATH HOUSE, SOUTH ADUVASSERY, KUNNUKARA, ERNAKULAM-683 578. BY ADVS.SRI.R.SANJITH SMT.C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KOCHI-683 111.

2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD, KOCHI AIRPORT P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 111.

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 16235 of 2015 (D) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

----------------------------------------- EXT. P1 :

TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11-5-2015. EXT. P2 :

TRUE COPY OF THE LAND ACQUISITION CERTIFICATE BEARING LAC.NO.70/95.

EXT. P3 :

TRUE COPY OF THE LAND ACQUISITION CERTIFICATE BEARING LAC.NO.21/95.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 16235 of 2015 (D) ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of June, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner seeks consideration of Ext.P1 representation. The petitioner admittedly is a person who owns certain lands which were taken over for the purpose of building an airport by the Cochin International Airport Society. The certificates of such acquisition made is evident at Exts. P2 and P3.

2.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a policy, which is brought in by the respondent Corporation, by which the evictees were granted either employment or permits for providing services inside the airport.

3.

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Airport Authority would, however, contend that the said policy was only with respect to persons whose residences were taken over by the respondent Corporation.

W.P.(C) No. 16235/2015 -24.

In any event, the petitioner has made an application at Ext.P1 and the petitioner's eligibility would have to be considered by the respondents, which shall be done, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner for hearing, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE jjj