Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the cancellation of a plot allotment by the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board (now Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board) on the banks of the Cooum River. The appellant, Balachandran, had been granted the allotment, but the government formulated a policy to clean the Cooum River for public benefit. Consequently, the Board cancelled the allotment through proceedings dated 09.11.2020, offering an alternate site. Aggrieved, the appellant filed a writ petition challenging the cancellation. A Single Judge of the Madras High Court dismissed the petition on 07.03.2023, noting that the land was on the river bank and alternate accommodation had been provided. The appellant then filed the present writ appeal. The legal issue was whether the cancellation was valid and whether the provision of alternate accommodation justified eviction. The appellants contended that the cancellation was unjustified and sought restoration of the allotment. The respondents argued that allotment on a river bank is impermissible, the project serves larger public interest, and alternate accommodation is sufficient. The Division Bench, comprising Justices S.M. Subramaniam and K. Rajasekar, noted that the subject land is situated on the banks of Cooum River and that the government's policy to clean the river is in public interest. The court observed that allotment on river banks is questionable due to proximity to a waterbody, and that banks of a river cannot be allotted for construction. The Additional Advocate General informed that the alternate tenement had not been occupied. The court held that the cancellation was justified, and the appellants must vacate and hand over the premises to enable the project. If they fail to do so, the respondents may evict them. The court gave liberty to the appellants to seek other compensation if entitled. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Headnote
A) Property Law - Allotment of Land on River Banks - Prohibition on Construction Near Waterbodies - Not specified - The allotment was on the banks of Cooum River, and the court observed that the banks of a river cannot be allotted for construction; cancellation upheld as it is in larger public interest for the river cleaning project. Held that the cancellation of allotment is valid and the appellants must vacate (Paras 2-4, 6). B) Government Policy - Eviction for Public Project - Alternate Accommodation as Compensation - Not specified - Alternate tenement was provided to the appellants, making eviction justified; if the appellants fail to vacate, the respondents may evict them; liberty granted to seek other compensation if entitled. Held that alternate accommodation is sufficient to justify eviction for public project (Paras 3, 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether cancellation of plot allotment on Cooum River bank for public project was valid and whether alternate accommodation justified eviction.
Final Decision
The Writ Appeal is dismissed. The appellants are directed to vacate and hand over the subject premises to the authorities to enable implementation of the Cooum River project. If they fail to do so, the respondents may evict them and take possession. No order as to costs. Liberty granted to the appellants to seek any other compensation they may be entitled to.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Allotments on river banks are impermissible due to proximity to waterbody
- public interest projects override individual allotments
- eviction justified when alternate accommodation provided
- appellant cannot obstruct public project implementation.
