Chennai: In a split verdict two judges of a division bench of the Madras high court gave a contrary orders in a matter relating to the encroachment of 58.17 acres of government poromboke land by a deemed university in Thanjavur.
The division bench comprising Justices Nooty Ramamohana Rao, (now retired), SM. Subramaniam passed the order in an appeal filed by the secretary, revenue department, state government, seeking to set aside the judgment delivered by a single judge order in relating to the encroachment of 58.17 acres of government poromboke land by Sastra. As a result of contradictory views, the matter has been referred to the Chief Justice, Madras high court for placing it before a third Judge.
A single judge in his order earlier, set aside the eviction proceedings initiated by the government and stated that the petitioner’s institution also has to be treated equally by way of allotting the land as it was done in the other cases. Aggrieved by this the government filed the present appeal challenging the order.
While Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao directed the government to collect a payment of Rs 10 crore from Sastra for the encroachment for assigning the land in favour of them Justice SM. Subramaniam opposed it and directed the superintendent of police to provide adequate protection for the district administration for the eviction and also directed to recover appropriate compensation, a penalty from the educational institution for their illegal occupation.
He said “The property encroached by the institution is, to the extent of 58.17 acres. By directing the Institution to deposit Rs 10 crore (as directed by the senior judge) cannot be a ground to condone the criminal trespass and the offence of the encroachment committed by them.”
The encroached land will cost more than Rs 50 crores and flaying the officials for allowing the Institution to encroach upon the land and the precedent created by the state in some other cases the judge in his order said “The wrong precedent created by the state in some other cases will not confer any legal right on the Institution to claim encroachment as a matter of right. Encroachment is an offence and the offender cannot cite a wrong precedent so as to escape from the liability.”
“This court is of the clear view that alienation by the state shall be provided only for the public welfare and in the interest of the public. The state shall not have any power to alienate the land in favour of private individuals for the purpose of Commercial establishments or commercial institutions,” he said
The judge then directed the SP to provide adequate protection for the district administration for eviction process and also directed to recover appropriate compensation, a penalty from the Institution for their illegal occupation. The judge also directed to initiate inquiry penal/ disciplinary proceedings against the government officials found to be colluding and involved in support of the encroachment of government land.
