Kerala High Court
M.M. Sarangadharan vs Union Of India on 9 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
Thursday, the 9th day of June 2022 / 19th Jyaishta, 1944
WP(C) NO. 3733 OF 2022(N)
PETITIONERS:
1. M.M. SARANGADHARAN, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAN NAIR, VADAPPALLY
THEKKEVEETTIL, CHEPPILATHARA PEROOR, PEROOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 637.
2. GEORGE SEBASTIAN, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. LATE P. V. GEORGE, A-3,
KOTTAPPURATHU, CLIFF VALLEY, KAWDIYAR P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -
695 003.
RESPONDENTS:
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS,
RAIL BHAVAN, 256-A, RAISINA ROAD, RAJPATH AREA, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3. KERALA RAIL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, TRANS TOWER, 5TH FLOOR,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR.
4. THE RAILWAY BOARD INDIAN RAILWAY, 256-A, RAIL BHAVAN, RAISINA ROAD,
NEW DELHI - 110 001, REPRESENTED BY CHAIRPERSON.
5. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION (SILVER LINE), COLLECTORATE,
KOTTAYAM - 686 001.
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to direct the respondents to dispose of Exhibit- P7
representation, pending final disposal of this Writ Petition (Civil).
This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition
and the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and this Court's order dated
24.05.2022 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S NOBLE MATHEW and
P.M.JOSEPH, Advocates for the petitioners, SRI. S.MANU, ASSISTANT
SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA for R1 and R4, SRI. T.B.HOOD, Advocate for R2
and R5, SMT. ASHA CHERIAN, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER for R3 and of SRI.
C.DINESH RAO, Advocate for R4, the court passed the following:
P.T.O
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
================================
W.P.(C) Nos.30567/2021, 9341/2022,
4043/2022, 3733/2022, 975/2022, 1574/22,
2847/2022, 2913/2022
================================
Dated this the 9th day of June, 2022
ORDER
It is rather strange that even when the Government of India,
through their additional statement dated 02.06.2022, unequivocally
states that 'the Government of India and the Railways have not
approved/concurred the Social Impact Assessment study conducted
by the State of Kerala', the available records show that the Kerala
Rail Development Corporation Limited (KRDCL) is actively assisting
the same.
2. What is pertinent is that all the parties are ad idem that
the KRDCL is a Joint Venture (JV) between the Government of Kerala
and the Government of India.
3. Therefore, when the Government of India avers that they
have not approved or even concurred with the SIA, they must
disclose whether they had instructed the KRDCL not to be part of the
same. This aspect is conspicuously silent in their pleadings.
4. I am persuaded to direct the Government of India to
answer this because, in spite of the interim order, dated 24.05.2022
in W.P.(C)No.30567/2021, the Special Officer of the KRDCL appears
to have approached the Director of Survey for permission to install
W.P.(C) Nos.30567/2021 & conn. cases
larger concrete poles for the purpose of demarcation of boundaries
during the survey and this has been now granted approval by the latter
Authority.
5. Prima facie, this Court can only see this to be an attempt to
overreach the orders of this Court because, otherwise, the KRDCL
ought to have sought clarification or permission from this Court, before
approaching the Director of Survey.
6. As matters stand now, the factual matrix is extremely
amorphous.
7. On one side, the Government of India says that they did not
approve the SIA; while the KRDCL - which is the JV between them and
the Government of Kerala - says they are supporting the same, since
they have been told not to do so.
8. Of course, the stand of the Government of Kerala, as
argued by Sri.T.B.Hood is that, for conducting SIA, the permission of
the Government of India is not necessary because, as per Section 4 of
the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency Act, they are the
appropriate Government.
9. However, the question whether the KRDCL should support
it or assist it, certainly is a decision that has to be taken by the 'JV'
which, the Government of India must answer.
10. At this time, Sri.Dinesh Rao - learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the KRDCL, submitted that he will place on record some
W.P.(C) Nos.30567/2021 & conn. cases
additional documents and pleadings, particularly with respect to the
request made by the Special Officer before the Director of Survey for
laying of larger boundary stones.
I stop with a clear clarification that this Court is not against the
SIA being conducted by the Government of Kerala at this stage; but
which however, will be answered in the judgment when it is delivered.
Post on 30.06.2022 for judgment.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
rp
09-06-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
