Chennai: The Madras high court has restrained the authorities from issuing any notification for acquiring land belonging to Good Shepherd Convent in Nungambakkam for the purpose of metro rail project.
Justice V. Bharathidasan passed the interim order on a petition filed by Good Shepherd Convent, which sought to quash the notice dated June 13, 2018, issued by the land acquisition officer, which sought to acquire 3,590 sq.mt belonging to the Good Shepherd Convent situated at Nungambakkam village in Chennai for the purpose of constructing corridor-3-17 Sterling Road junction metro station.
The judge posted to September 19, further hearing of the case.
In his interim order, the judge said the grievance was that the petitioner, being a reputed century old institution, with the noble object of imparting education up to higher secondary level with extracurricular activities to bring up excellence among the future citizens, was now put to an ordeal at the hands of the state authorities, by way of land acquisition proceedings for the purpose of metro rail, by which, almost 3/4th of the play ground, which was provided by the school not only to comply with the requirements of the educational authorities but also for the betterment of physical and mental health of the students, was sought to be acquired. In the event of the play ground being acquired, it would be nothing but thwarting the entire system of education adopted by the school to become meaningless, by making the school and its students to roam here and there searching for playground, which cannot be treated as an unwanted one, the petitioner had added.
Senior counsel Xavier Arulraj submitted that though the metro rail for which the acquisition was sought to be made was only for the public purpose, considering the plight of the petitioner on behalf of its students, the authorities can re-consider the issue and seek for some alternative site in the opposite direction or can restrict the acquisition to a lesser extent having sufficient space for the playground, especially, when the acquisition sought for was to locate the railway station. He further said even though the petitioner has already made its objection before the acquisition officer concerned and the same has not been considered so far.
“Having regard to the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and on considering the fact that the objection filed by the petitioner school is pending with the land acquisition officer and the other facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits and demerits of the case, this court directs the land acquisition officer to give a personal hearing to the petitioner on October 1 and the petitioner is
directed to appear before the LAO on that date and raise all his objection with supporting materials, if any. The LAO is further directed to consider the objections of the petitioner and thereafter pass appropriate orders on the same before issuing a notification under section 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act. Until such final orders are passed as directed above, the respondents (authorities) are restrained from issuing any notification under section 3 (1) of the Act”, the judge added.
