'Compassionate orders’ for SASTRA Univ despite court directions raise concerns over rule of law
The Supreme Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government to reconsider the appeal filed by SASTRA University, a private deemed university in Thanjavur, against the acquisition of 31 acres of encroached government land, while also observing that encroachment on public land cannot be condoned. Private education is widely perceived as a profit-oriented enterprise, and deemed universities are no exception. In this background, can a government be expected to take a lenient view of a private educational institution merely because thousands of students are enrolled there? If a private university were to encroach upon river land or other ecologically sensitive public property and seek similar indulgence, citing students’ education, would such a plea have legal validity? Can students’ interests justify dilution of the law when the management is clearly responsible for violations?
— R Murugan, Chennai
The Supreme Court has taken seemingly inconsistent positions while dealing with encroachments. It has ordered the demolition of multi-storeyed apartments constructed in violation of planning regulations, notwithstanding the pleas of innocent purchasers. In Chennai too, at Govindasamy Puram near Raja Annamalaipuram, the court ordered the demolition of several well-built houses abutting the Buckingham Canal, even though the MRTS railway line and stations themselves were constructed over the canal.
When the Tamil Nadu government was negotiating for a peaceful resolution, the court summoned the then Chief Secretary and observed that if the State police were incapable of carrying out evictions, paramilitary forces should be deployed. After the court’s clear position in the bulldozer eviction cases, the law is settled that encroachments must be removed strictly by following due process. It is surprising that despite clear judicial directions, SASTRA University appears to be receiving compassionate consideration, raising serious questions about the consistency and sanctity of the rule of law.
Lifetime maintenance under Hindu Marriage law assured; payable as lump sum or extended periods
A family friend divorced a few years ago, and the judgment entitles her to alimony. However, her former husband and his father, both lawyers, are exerting pressure to ensure that the amount is paid only monthly. How does one approach the court to address such conduct repeatedly? Is there a clear mechanism to monitor defaults, or does the law provide for a structured authority or guideline to deal with persistent non-compliance?
— Badri Seshadri, Mylapore, Chennai
The law relating to maintenance for divorced Hindu couples is well settled. During the pendency of divorce proceedings, the spouse is entitled to interim maintenance. With regard to permanent alimony, the court has discretion to award it either as a lump sum or as periodic payments, depending on the financial capacity and assets of the former husband.
Unlike several Western jurisdictions, Indian law does not recognise the automatic division of matrimonial property. Nevertheless, lifetime maintenance is expressly protected under the Hindu Marriage law, and courts are empowered to enforce compliance through appropriate legal remedies in cases of default.