Notice to Centre, State on green corridor

The division bench comprising Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice N. Seshasayee on hearing preliminary arguments in this regard posted the case to July 12 for further hearing to decide on the plea’s maintainability.

The petitioner G Sundarrajan, part of Poovulagin Nanbargal, a public trust, had contended that in suppression of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, the Parliament had come out with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

But contrary to the Act’s purpose of ensuring a humane, participative and transparent process for land acquisition for development of essential infrastructure facilities with least disturbance to the land owners and other affected families, the Centre had commenced land acquisition under section 3A (1) of the National Highways Act. 1956, which falls under the fourth schedule of the Act wherein the process of consultation does not arise.

Based on this, the petition on describing the very inclusion of the National High Ways Act, in the fourth schedule as irrational, sought the court to declare the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the proposed Green Field Chennai Salem Highway as unconstitutional and null and void.

The plea also pointed out that despite the notification released on June 06 offering those affected to file their objection in just 21 days, the land acquisition process has commenced despite it affecting people in as many as five districts- Kanchipuram, Tiruvannamalai, Dharampuri, Krishnagiri and Salem-in the State.

However, Advocate General Vijay Narayan appearing for the State submitted that the benefits accruing under the Act would be awarded to the land owners and they are set to be paid three to four times more than the value of the land along with other benefits.

Additional Solicitor General G. Rajagopalan appearing for the Centre argued that the petitioner is not affected by the notification and hence has no loco standi to move such a PIL.