Nilgiris Collector asked report on lease granted for ‘river’ area

According to petitioner, though the lease period ended in 2013, local authorities continued to collect lease rents from him till June 2018. He also pointed out that the bus stand also stands on ‘river

Published: 17th February 2019 01:43 AM  |   Last Updated: 17th February 2019 03:13 AM   |  A+A-

By Express News Service

CHENNAI: THE Madras High Court has called for reports from The Nilgiris Collector and Revenue Officer as to under what circumstances, leases were granted to individuals on a land in Coonoor taluk, which according to records is classified as a ‘River’.

The second bench of Justices Vineet Kothari and C V Karthikeyan gave the directive while passing interim orders on a PIL petition from I Thulasi Bai of Ottupattarai, challenging an order dated February 7 issued under Sec. 6 and 7 of TN Encroachment Act. The order sought to evict the petitioner, who was running a tea shop at the place in question from 2010.

According to petitioner, though the lease period ended in 2013, local authorities continued to collect lease rents from him till June 2018. He also pointed out that the bus stand also stands on ‘river’ site.
The bench was told that the impugned notice was issued pursuant to a directive of a single judge given on January 11 this year that the land in question is classified as a ‘river’ comprising 0.00.30 hectares and therefore, the petitioner and others deserve to be evicted from the area.

“In the circumstances, we prima facie, do not appreciate how the leases were granted to private parties and now reversing that stand, the State intends to evict the petitioner and others in pursuance of the directions of a single judge on January 11. If it is actually a river, the leases could not have been granted at all. The officials, who granted such leases, are equally responsible and have to be booked with appropriate disciplinary action. The court would consider this aspect after the authorities file their counter-affidavits”, the judges said and posted the matter for further hearing on February 22.