Criticisms are mounting by the day against the July 25 verdict of a Kerala High Court division bench ordering restoration of public lands taken over by the Government in 2007 from three resort companies. legal experts point out that the same High Court, which on July 25 ordered payment of compensation to a demolished resort, had in 2007 cleared the demolition effectively.
It has already been pointed out that the bench, headed by Chief Justice Manjula Chellur, had pronounced the verdict which in effect favoured land-grabbers two days after she had received the order of her transfer to Kolkata. It has also been alleged that the verdict, pronounced eight months after the completion of hearing, was in violation of the Supreme Court guidelines.
The division bench had ordered restoration of the lands taken over from the three resort companies, including ‘Cloud 9’ at Chinnakkanal in Munnar, and payment of Rs 10-lakh compensation to Cloud 9 for demolishing its buildings. Ironically, the same High Court had in 2007 rejected an appeal of Cloud 9 seeking stoppage of demolition.
The Special Task Force constituted by the then lDF Government for reclaiming grabbed public lands in Munnar had demolished the buildings of Cloud 9 on June 2, 2007 after a single-judge bench and a division bench of the High Court dismissed the same day a petition filed by the company’s managing partner seeking stoppage of the land’s takeover.
The resort company’s plea to stop takeover of its land by the Government was first rejected by the single-judge bench of Justice S Sirijagan and its appeal, considered the same day, was dismissed by a division bench headed by then Chief Justice Hl Dattu. With this, the resort withdrew its plea and sought a day’s time to remove its things from the resort before demolition.
“All this had happened on a Friday. Time was given to Cloud 9 till the following evening. The special team had demolished the Cloud 9 resort using earthmoving machines on that day and the following day, Sunday. As this is the history of the case, how could the High Court now term the land takeover and resort demolition as illegalIJ” asked a senior lawyer.
The July 25 judgement had said that the special team had shown undue haste and had not fulfilled the legal obligations while taking over the land of Cloud 9 and two other resorts. While ordering a compensation of Rs 10 lakh to Cloud 9 for demolition of its buildings, the court also said that the resort could approach civil court to pursue its claim for Rs 15-crore compensation.
Environmentalists who demand demolition of all illegal constructions in Munnar, a hill resort with an extremely sensitive ecosystem, are worried that the new division bench order may influence the proceedings on the 111 petitions - challenging the 2007 Mission Munnar anti-encroachment drive - pending before the High Court.
In the meantime, sources close to State Assembly’s Opposition leader VS Achuthanandan, who as then Chief Minister had directly supervised the Mission Munnar anti-encroachment drive, said that he was preparing for a legal and political battle against the July 25 verdict of the High Court, which according to him was “mysterious”.
The Kerala Government has taken an in-principle decision to file a review petition in the High Court or to go for appeal in the Supreme Court against the verdict. However, Achuthanandan mighty take up battle in his personal capacity if the Government backed out from its present position, sources said.