K-Rail | Centre An Equal Partner In The Project, Equally Accountable As State: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Thursday continued to hear the petitions challenging the State authorities laying down survey stones on petitioners' property as part of the ongoing survey in furtherance of the K-Rail Silver Line project.

When the matter was taken up today, Justice Devan Ramachandran orally remarked that the Central government being a partner of the project has an equal responsibility to answer the questions posed regarding the K-Rail project. 

"This is a joint venture project of the Government of India and the Government of Kerala... The Government of India is also an equal partner in K-Rail, so your responsibility to answer all these questions is equal." 

Yesterday when the matter was taken up, there was no representation for the Centre before the Court. Although there was no representation today either initially, ASGI S.Manu made an appearance after the Court pointed out the absence of the Central government in the proceedings. 

Justice Ramachandran observed that K-Rail is a joint venture of the Centre and the State and that although the State was a major stakeholder, the project can only move forward with the approval of the Centre. Since the centre had not yet given final concurrence on land acquisition, the survey currently being conducted by the State was only an indication of their intent to acquire such land in the future. 

The Judge stated that his only concern was regarding the manner in which the survey was being conducted. However, it was noted that as per the decision of another Single Judge, it was proceeding in accordance with law and the Supreme Court had also refused to interfere with the land survey and social impact assessment (SIA) process.

"When the Supreme Court says there's nothing wrong with the conduct of the SIA, I don't want to intervene. What is the prejudice caused by an SIA anyway? My only concern was the manner in which the survey was being conducted and now the high court and the Supreme Court have said it's proceeding in the right manner and that a survey can go simultaneously with an SIA."

Accordingly, the Court closed one of the petitions noting that the grievance therein was already addressed by the above decisions. However, it was clarified that if the petitioners were allowed to review the decision, the contentions will be heard again.

During the hearing, it was also observed how initially the entire process seemed to be leading to land acquisition.

"But that has been watered down now. Much water has flown since the past four months in the matter."

As to the remaining petitions, the Court posed the following four questions for the concerned authorities to answer: 

1) Is the State government the competent authority to conduct the SIA since the project passes through Mahe (Goa) as well? Does the project pass through Puducherry, too?

2) Can the authorities abruptly enter private property without serving individual notice to the landowners?

3) Will there be any hindrances for the landowners of the marked properties in availing loans or mortgaging their property with cooperative or banking institutions?

4) Are the survey stones laid down by the authorities permanent?

The Court also pointed out that although the last question had been posed to the State at an earlier instance, it had refused to give an answer to the same. 

Addressing the common concern of the public regarding their lands being frozen, the Judge remarked: 

"The project should and could have been advanced smoothly. If the cooperative sector comes up and declares that the K-Rail survey stones will not hinder mortgage process, the people will not be so anxious about the whole approach. I'm trying to uproot the fear from the minds of some people like the petitioners so that we can get the project through. If you clarify that there is no freezing of their lands, half the problems will be solved. These huge engraved concrete stones are some of the symbols that create fear in the minds of people. "

During the last hearing of the case, the Bench had remarked that it has inputs that assure that none of the properties marked by the survey stones in furtherance of the project will be subject to any restrictions whatsoever.

Earlier, the Court had expressed its concerns if the property so marked be used by landowners for sale or mortgage and if such property can be produced to avail bank loans.

The Court will continue to hear the matter tomorrow.

The Judge had earlier directed the State to temporarily defer steps for the survey of the writ petitioners' properties until the matters were called up for the next hearing. However, this order was set aside by a Division Bench noting that Social Impact Assessment cannot be seen as an empty formality and that the public is entitled to know the adverse impact and consequences they are likely to suffer.