Chennai: The Madras high court on Tuesday set aside an order of a single judge which directed the authorities to return unutilised11.26 acres of land to the legal heirs of the erstwhile land owner. The land had originally been acquired for a water supply project but later granted on lease to Chennai Port Trust for its container parking in Thiruvottiyur.
Allowing the appeals filed by the Thiruvottiyur municipality and Chennai Port Trust (CPT), a division bench comprising Justices K.K.Sasidharan and P.Velmurugan said, “The question of invoking section 48B of the Land Acquisition Act does not arise in the subject case for the simple reason that part of the acquired land has already been used for the very same purpose. The remaining part of the land is now used by the government for another public purpose. This aspect was not taken note of by the writ court. We are therefore of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside”.
The land acquired by the state for a water supply project floated by the Thiruvottiyur municipality, which was now part of Chennai corporation was partly utilised for the scheme and the remaining land could not be used on account of the replenishment of sea water.
Later, when it was found that there was heavy traffic congestion in the area on account of parking of container trucks coming to the Chennai Port, the government took a decision to allot the land to the CPT to establish a container station with customs warehousing. It has been in operation from May 2007.
However, by an order dated January 6, 2015, the single judge directed the authorities to return the land to one of the legal heirs of the erstwhile land owner on the ground that the land was not utilised for the purpose for which it was acquired. Aggrieved, the present appeals were filed.
The bench said this was not an ordinary case of return of the unutilised land like other cases under section 48B of the Act.
This was a clear case of utilisation of a part of the land for the original scheme and the balance for another public purpose by the requisitioning department. By utilising the land for the container station, the municipality originally and subsequently the Chennai corporation, have discharged their statutory obligation to the taxpayers.
This court should compliment the local body for undertaking such pilot schemes for the welfare of the people rather than directing closure of the project and reconveyance of the land to the erstwhile owner, who lost his right over the land on account of payment of compensation in 1964. “In view of all these reasons, we do not find any ground to entertain the request for reconveyance”, the bench added.
