Chennai: In a setback to the state government, the Madras High court on Tuesday stayed the dispossession of land from farmers and members of the public for the proposed Rs 10,000 crore Salem-Chennai Greenfield Expressway until further orders.
When batch of writ petitions came up for hearing before the division bench comprising Justices T.S. Sivagnanam and V. Bhavani Subbaroyan, the bench has directed the State Government not to dispossess the land owners from the land in question, which they proposed to acquire, until further orders.
The writ petitions were filed seeking to declare that Section 105 and the IVth Schedule of the Right to Fair Compensation in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and entire land acquisition proceedings initiated under the National Highways Act, for proposed Greenfield Salem-Chennai Highway as unconstitutional, null and void.
Earlier, on July 18, when the matter came up for hearing before the bench, the judges said that it appears that as of now the apprehension in the minds of the land owners is that they will be forcibly dispossessed from their respective lands. In this regard, what has been reported in several Media as well as various television channels is that police force is used on land owners, who have raised their voice protesting against the land acquisition proceedings.
However, Advocate General submitted that the question of taking over possession will arise only after the declaration of acquisition in accordance with Section 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956. The bench said under such circumstances, “we fail to understand as to why there should be use of police force etc. This in our considered opinion is avoidable provided the local public are sensitized, as the effect of the proceedings they propose to take is under the provisions of the Act.”
When the matter came up for hearing on Tuesday, senior counsel for the petitioners stated that still the landowners have grave apprehension in their minds that they would be forcefully dispossessed from their respective lands. He said local people should be sensitized and counseled by the State government that there is no threat of dispossession.
The advocate general replied that pamphlets have been circulated in the respective areas explaining about the project. He also submitted a copy of the pamphlet and photographs before the bench.
After perusing the pamphlet the bench said, "we have gone through the pamphlets, which have been stated to have been circulated in Kanchipuram district. It largely speaks about the project which is to be implemented, the proposal to plant ten trees for every tree which is to be removed, assuring the public that on account of the formation of the road, mineral deposits in the district will not be affected, the interest of pedestrians will be sufficiently safeguarded by providing adequate barricades, the total extent which has to be acquired, the compensation that would be paid and finally that it is a very special scheme and it would benefit the people.
However, the bench said, "we find that there is absolutely no whisper about the assurance given by the officials to the land owners that they will not be forcibly dispossessed from their respective lands."
Advocate General has reiterates that there is no threat of dispossession of the landowners. The bench said, "considering the fact and the sensitivity of the matter and the category of persons from whom the lands are proposed to be acquired, we deem it appropriate that we clarify the aspect, which has been placed before us by the Advocate General so that it will allay all the fears of the land owners and the challenge to the land acquisition proceedings in whatever manner done could be heard and decided on merits and in accordance with law."
The bench specifically directed the State government not to dispossess the respective land owners from the land in question, which they propose to acquire, until further orders in these writ petitions. After passing the interim order the bench posted the matter for further hearing to September 11.
