The M.D.,Chennai Metro Rail Ltd vs N. Ismail & Ors

3. These appeals have been filed by the State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Managing Director of Chennai Metro Rail Ltd. and the Principal Secretary to Government Revenue LD-1(1) Department. The issue concerned in these appeals relates to an extent of 5 Grounds and 275 sq.ft. of land in T.S. No.43/2 in Chennai District, Fort Tondiarpet Taluk, Block No.7 of Vepery Village. The abovesaid land along with another land in an extent of one Cawni 10 Grounds and 1871 sq.ft. in T.S. No.41 of the same Vepery Village, Fort Tondiarpet Taluk, Chennai District was granted by the Government of Tamil Nadu to one Sir Ramaswamy Mudaliar to build a Choultry for the use of persons who come by rail from different parts of the presidency and who have no homes or friends in Madras. The Government while assigning the above lands to Sir Ramaswamy Mudaliar imposed certain conditions to the effect that the Choultry should be available for the free use of railway travelers, that the buildings constructed should be approved by the Government and more importantly, “that the land shall be liable to resumption, without compensation, if it ceases to be employed for the purpose for which it is granted or is used for any other purposes, without the permission of the Government”.

5. Subsequently, under a Scheme Decree framed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in C.S. No.90 of 1963 all the above mentioned properties held by Sir Ramaswami Mudaliar’s Choultry were vested with the Administrator General and Official Trustee (hereinafter referred to as “the AG & OT) of Tamil Nadu on 18.08.1970. From then onwards the management of the Trust and the properties attached with it were under the control of the AG & OT. As per the Scheme Decree, the AG & OT of Tamil Nadu leased out the lands in T.S. No.41 and T.S. No.43/2 to various tenants and was collecting the rent. As far as T.S. No.43/2 comprised in an extent of 5644 sq.ft. was concerned, the same was leased out to the first respondent herein under the lease deed dated 22.12.1972. According to the AG & OT, the First Respondent is in arrears and as on 31.12.2012, the arrears payable by the First Respondent works out to a sum of Rs.94,84,630/- which has been computed and determined by the High Court of Madras. It is also stated that the First Respondent has preferred Special Leave Petition(C) No.11-12 of 2010 against the said determination and claim which is pending in this Hon’ble Court.

6. According to the First Respondent, pursuant to the lease granted in his favour, which was registered as document 105 of 1974 in the Office of Sub-Registrar, West Madras, he constructed a Hotel and started the business in the year 1987. According to him, subsequently, an adjacent piece of land measuring 4141 sq. ft was granted on lease for a period of 30 years to one Smt. Vatsala again based on the Order of the High Court of Madras, which was also supported by a registered Lease Deed dated 29.04.1982 bearing Document No.1492/1984 registered in the office of the Registrar, Madras (North). The said Smt. Vatsala also stated to have transferred her lease hold right in respect of the said extent to the First Respondent which was also stated to have been approved by the Official Trustee in the proceeding dated 05.04.1989 in R.O.C. No.2390 of 1989/OT. The First Respondent claimed to have put up two pucca structures and running two Star Hotels known as ‘Hotel Central Tower’ and ‘Hotel Howrah’. The First Respondent also claimed to have got the approval of the Municipality, State Government and other authorities and that the buildings were duly assessed for property tax and other statutory dues. By Order dated 10.12.2004 in Application No.915/2003, the lease in favour of the First Respondent was stated to have been extended for a further period of 25 years by enhancing the rent payable by him. The First Respondent also relied upon an Order of the Division Bench of the High Court dated 20.08.2009 in support of the extension of the lease passed in O.S.A. No.298 of 2004 and connected batch cases. According to the First Respondent because of his old age and other physical ailments he entered into a partnership arrangement with the applicant in I.A. Nos.1 and 2 of 2014 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.26020-21 of 2013 under the partnership deed dated 28.03.2013.

7. Be that as it may, having regard to the unprecedented growth of population in general, as well as with particular reference to the Metropolitan City of Chennai, there was an imminent need for providing better transport facilities for the commuters and office goers, as well as business people, which persuaded the State to expand the rail transport facility in the City of Chennai. With that avowed object, the appellant in Special Leave Petition (C) No.26020-21 of 2013 came into being and the said Chennai Metro Rail Limited planned a project called ‘Chennai Metro Rail Project’ which envisaged construction of two corridors under Phase-1. Corridor 1 starts from Washermenpet and ends at Airport for a length of 23.1 kms. and Corridor 2 starts from Chennai Central and ends at St. Thomas Mount Station for a length of 22 kms. As per the project, the portions of Corridor 1 with a length of 14.3 kms. between Washermenpet to Saidapet and in Corridor - 2 with a length of 9.7 kms. from Chennai Central to Anna Nagar would be underground corridors and the remaining in an elevated position.

8. The Chennai Metro Rail Limited is stated to be a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) formed for the purpose of implementing the ‘Chennai Metro Rail Project’. The Project is stated to be funded by the Government of India and the State Government by way of equal equity contribution in subordinate debt. (Government of India 20%, Government of Tamil Nadu 20.78% and the balance 59.22% being met from the loan assistance from Japan International Co-operation agency). The Government of India is stated to have accorded sanction for the project as well as for its participation.

9. The lands concerned in these appeals are covered by the project, namely, Corridor 1, i.e. from Washermenpet to Chennai Airport. According to the appellant, in Special Leave Petition (C) No.26020-21 of 2013, the project is a time bound project with an objective to ease out phenomenal growth of traffic congestion in the City of Chennai and any delay in carrying out the project would affect the plans announced by the Government of India, as well as, the State Government, the convenience of the public of Chennai and further will lead to contractual implications such as extension of time and escalation of project costs, which in turn would cost the public exchequer several hundred crores of rupees. According to the Chennai Metro, any further delay on any account, apart from causing high amount of cost escalation, would also deprive the citizens of Chennai a safe and quick means of public transport. It is stated that the Chennai Metro in its project report has described in detail the various length of the projects and in the said statement, designed constructions of underground stations at Washermenpet, Mannadi, High Court, Chennai Central and Egmore and associated tunnels, the details of the location, the description, the access date from commencement of the works with particular reference to the number of days and the vacate date from commencement of the work with particular reference of number of days is specified after making meticulous calculations.

10. Mr. Nageswara Rao, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellants brought to our notice the work which was to be carried out in the land concerned in this appeal which has been noted in the column under locations/drawing reference bearing No.SCC-14 and the description has been shown as entrance area. As far as access date is concerned, it is noted as 365 days from commencement of the works and the date to be vacated after completion of the work from the date of commencement is noted as 1520 days. According to learned Additional Solicitor General, for the purpose of starting the work in the land in question, as per the schedule, the Chennai Metro should have access to the land within 365 days of the commencement of the project and complete the work in that land within 1520 days from the date of such access. It was pointed out that such details have been specified in the contract agreement and that to ensure that the works are carried out without any deviation and within the time schedule, the required plans were also prepared in so far as it related to SCC-14 and was submitted with the details of lands falling under Survey No.43/2. The learned Additional Solicitor General also submitted that the said land were earmarked for erecting a mechanical plant room, electrical plant room, building services, drop-off and pick-up facilities and Airport check-in facilities. The plan which were enclosed along with the Special Leave Petition paper book between pages 164 to 167 disclose the area falling under Survey No.43/2, the various facilities to be set up in that land along with the other facilities to be provided in the lands adjacent to the said Survey No.43/2.

11. It was also the case of the Chennai Metro that since the lands in Survey No.43/2 belong to the State Government and was imminently required for the Chennai Metro Project which was out and out in public interest, the State Government came forward to allot the said lands after retrieving it from Sir Ramaswamy Mudaliar Choultry through the AG & OT and by GO Ms. No.168 dated 21.05.2012 passed orders to that effect. Before issuing the said GO, the procedure to be followed for transfer of the said lands in favour of the Chennai Metro Pvt. Limited were also carried out. As the lands belong to the State Government there was no necessity for any acquisition being involved or any payment of compensation to be made in favour of anyone except for the Buildings standing thereon. Since the State Government’s participation is equal in proportion along with the Government of India and inasmuch as the development of the project was in the interest of the public at large the GO dated 21.05.2012 came to be issued.

12. Aggrieved by the Order of the Government in GO Ms. No.168 of 21.05.2012, the First Respondent and various other persons who were in possession of the other adjacent lands, which were also covered by the abovesaid GO, approached the High Court by filing Writ Petitions. The First Respondent’s Writ Petitions were Writ Petition Nos.19469/2012 and 19470/2012 wherein he sought for issuance of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the proceedings in GO No.168 of 21.05.2012 and the consequential proceedings of the Tehsildar dated 21.06.2012 as well as the proceedings of the AG & OT dated 25.06.2012 and for quashing the said proceedings. It is stated that pursuant to the issuance of the GO Ms. No.168 dated 21.05.2012, the Tehsildar of Fort Tondiarpet Taluk issued a notice to AG & OT on 21.06.2012 for resumption of the land and handover vacant possession. Individual notices were also stated to have been issued to all the occupants including the First Respondent asking them to vacate the premises and remove their belonging and handover vacant possession. In turn, the AG & OT by its notice 25.06.2012 called upon the First Respondent and the other tenants to vacate the premises immediately to enable the AG & OT to handover possession to Chennai Metro.

13. By Order dated 26.11.2012, the Writ Petitions filed by the First Respondent and other occupants came to be allowed by the learned Single Judge and the GO Ms. No.168 dated 21.05.2012 was set aside. Aggrieved by the Judgment of the learned Single Judge the appellants herein preferred Writ Appeals 68 to 106 of 2013. The Division Bench after a detailed discussion allowed Writ Appeal Nos. 70 to 88 and 91 to 106 of 2013 holding that the said Chennai Metro Rail Project, a joint venture of Central Government was to enhance the public transport system in Chennai and being a public project, any delay in implementation would oust the public purpose for which the lands were sought to be retrieved. However, Writ Appeal Nos.68, 69, 89 and 90 of 2013 which related to the lands falling under Survey No.43/2 which are in the possession of the First Respondent were concerned, according to the Division Bench the same stood on a different footing. The Division Bench in its order held as under in paragraph 28:

24. Therefore, while allowing the Appeals of the State Government as well as the Chennai Metro and while setting aside the Judgment of the Division Bench, Writ Appeal Nos.68, 69, 89 and 90 of 2013 are allowed. We, however, direct the Appellants to value the buildings belonging to the First Respondent standing in Survey No.43/2 and determine the compensation and pay the same to the First Respondent. The said exercise of valuation and payment of compensation shall be effected within three months from this date.

25. In the light of our above orders, the First Respondent is directed to surrender possession of the lands in Survey No.43/2 in an extent of 5644 sq. ft. through the AG & OT within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. With the above directions, these appeals are allowed.

February 21, 2014