Kerala High Court Stays For 2 Months Cheruvally Estate Acquisition For Sabarimala Greenfield Airport

“Pending consideration of the writ petitions, there will be an interim order directing the official respondents not to take any further steps pursuant to Ext.P43 notification, issued under Section 11(1) produced in W.P.(C) No.13775 of 2024, for a period of 2 months. It is also ordered that the petitioners and respondents in both the writ petitions shall maintain the status quo in respect of the property, which is the subject matter of Ext.P43 notification”, stated the Court

The writ petition averred that government's previous attempts to acquire the Cheruvally Estate had led to a series of litigations. It was argued that since the government failed in those litigations, it initiated proceedings under the 2013 Act for land acquisition. The government then invoked its powers under the 2013 Act to acquire 2263.18 acres of land of Cheruvally Estate by depositing the entire compensation amount. It was argued that the government was trying to acquire the land under the 2013 Act with ulterior and malafide motives.

It was also contended that assigning the social impact assessment study to the Centre for Management Development which is a government agency violated Rule 10(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency (Kerala) Rules, 2015. As per Rule 10 (2), Social Impact Assessment units should not be an agency with government connections.

The petitioners further contended that the government did not consider alternate feasible locations and objections regarding the adverse social and environmental impacts. It was stated that factors like loss of drinking water sources, loss of water sources for cattle, loss of grazing land, plantations and loss of presence of place of worship on land acquisition were also not considered. The petitioners argued that as per Section 11(1), the reason for acquisition of land was incorrectly given as public purpose when it was acquired for public-private partnership projects.

On the other hand, the Counsel for the respondents contended that petitioners had already filed their objections under section 15 of the 2013 Act and the same will be considered by the government. Thus, filing a writ petition at this point was premature.

The Court stated that the government has already issued a preliminary notification under Section 11 (1) of the Act and at this stage objections filed under Section 15 would not be considered. It also stated that allegations of violation of provisions of the 2013 Act and (Kerala) Rules, 2015 by assigning the social impact assessment study to a government agency cannot be considered as objections under Section 15.

Court then admitted the matter and issued notice to State Government, District Collector, Deputy Collector and Special Tahasildar Land Acquisition of Kottayam district.

Counsel for Petitioners: Senior Advocate Amit Sibal instructed by Advocates Rishikesh Haridas and Dhiraj Philip, Advocate P Haridas instructed by Advocates Shijimol Mathew and Shijin P C

Counsel for Respondents: Additional Advocate General K P Jayachandran, Advocate S Chandrashekharan Nair

Case Title: Ayana Charitable Trust (formerly known as Gospel for Asia) v State of Kerala

Case Number: WPC 13775/2024, WPC 13659/2024

Click here to read/download Order