Petitions challenging G.O. on acquiring land for airport expansion dismissed

28-Mar-2008


“Absolutely no merit in challenge raised against the acquisition”
State entitled to proceed with acquisition, hand over lands to airport: Bench


CHENNAI: The decks were cleared on Thursday for acquiring lands for Chennai airport expansion with the Madras High Court dismissing petitions challenging a government order directing the District Collector, Kancheepuram, to issue notice to land holders for acquisition purposes.

Dismissing a batch of writ petitions, the First Bench, comprising Chief Justice A.P. Shah and Justice Prabha Sridevan, said it found absolutely no merit in the challenge raised against the acquisition proceedings by the State government under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act (TNALIPA) and the notices issued under the legislation.
The Bench heard arguments by Advocate-General, G. Masilamani, Assistant Solicitor-General of India P. Wilson and Airports Authority of India (AAI) counsel V.T. Gopalan, and K.M. Vijayan and N.R. Chandran for the petitioners. It held the State was entitled to proceed with the acquisition and hand over the lands to the airport authority.

The petitioners contended that the State government lacked competence to acquire the land for airport expansion as the field was occupied by Central legislation, namely the Airports Authority of India Act.

Even assuming that the acquisition could be made by the State, the same could not be done under the TNALIPA as the airport was neither an industrial area, industrial estate or an industry for the purpose of the Act for which acquisition could be made. Environmental clearance was a must for the proposed project and the same ought to have been obtained before the acquisition proceedings were initiated.

A petitioner contended that what was contemplated was only an extension of secondary runway crossing the Adyar river, which would require only 300 acres. Hence, 1,069.99 acres, spread over Manapakkam, Kolapakkam, Gerugambakkam and Tharapakkam villages, proposed for acquisition, were not required.

The Bench held that in the light of decided cases, it was clear that acquisition was an independent power. It said Mr. Gopalan and Mr. Wilson had given a categorical assurance that no construction activity would commence on the land before obtaining all environmental clearances. An application for necessary clearance had already been made.

The Advocate-General assured the court that if objections were filed on or before April 26, the District Collector would consider them on merit.

The Judges said a writ petition had been filed by the management of a residential school having more than 1,500 students. The Advocate-General assured the court that if the institution made a representation, the State would consider allotting alternative land for it in the nearby areas and also take appropriate measures for continuation of the students studies.

Regarding Kovur, the State had taken a policy decision to allot plots to householders. Referring to the contention by some plot holders that their houses were not fully completed due to the notification, and their cases also deserved to be considered for allotment of alternative land, the Bench said they were free to make a representation. If such a representation was received, the State would take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

http://www.hindu.com/2008/03/28/stories/2008032859761100.htm