Observing that “teachings and preachings made, standing on encroached soil, would only soil values and ethics of such teachings and preachings”, the Madras High Court has directed the State government to take possession of 20.62 acres of government land encroached upon by SASTRA University at Tirumalaisamudram in Thanjavur district.
Justice C.V. Karthikeyan made the observations while concurring with a dissenting judgment passed by Justice S.M. Subramaniam, who had differed with Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao (since retired) in September last and held that the land must necessarily be retrieved from the university without any scope for conveyance on payment of money.
Though the senior judge had suggested that the properties in possession of the university since 1984 could be conveyed to it on payment of ₹10 crore to the public exchequer, Justice Subramaniam stood his ground and held that the government should not only take back the land but also levy a penalty on the university for unauthorised occupation.
Third judge decides
In view of the differing verdicts delivered by the two judges on the issue, the matter was referred to a third judge and after a full hearing, Justice Karthikeyan agreed with the view taken by Justice Subramaniam.
The third judge had reserved his verdict in the principal seat of the High Court here and delivered it at its Madurai Bench.
Giving a quietus to the disagreement between the two judges, he said: “The respondents (SASTRA University and Vee See Bee Trust administering Shanmuga Polytechnic) have more than abundant additional unused lands and they would be serving a far greater cause if they voluntarily vacate and construct the buildings in their own lands.
“They must realise that they have prevented the construction of an open air prison which would also have imparted education through reformation to an equal number of adolescent children. By the act of encroachment, the respondents have directly prevented the reformation of these unfortunate adolescent children.”
Further, holding the university guilty of having done “public disservice,” the judge pointed out that the out of the total area of 58.17 acres, the respondents had enjoyed 20.62 acres for more than 30 years without paying a “single naya paise” for such occupation.
“These reasons compel me to concur with the dissenting judgment,” he added.
In his verdict, Justice Rao had held that the university could not be ordered to vacate when the government had conveyed similar lands to many other encroachers who included reputed educational institutions and hospitals.
However, Justice Subramaniam said that a wrong precedent set by the State would not confer a legal right on all encroachers.
