Acquisition of Jaya’s residence is in public curiosity, govt. tells HC

The State authorities has stoutly denied the cost of absence of any public curiosity in buying former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa’s residence Veda Nilayam at Poes Garden, Chennai, for the aim of changing it right into a memorial.

In a counter affidavit to a case filed by her authorized inheritor and niece J. Deepa, the Acquisition Officer N. Lakshmi stated conversion of residences of well-liked leaders into authorities memorials was a world-wide apply and never a brand new phenomenon.

“Apart from being a beacon of inspiration to residents of Tamil Nadu, the proposed memorial at Veda Nilayam will also serve as a tourist attraction. Therefore, the acquisition should be considered as falling within the meaning of public purpose,” she stated.

The officer additionally relied upon a pair of Supreme Court verdicts to say that the definition of the time period ‘public purpose’ was in depth in nature and as such an enlarged which means or interpretation needs to be employed whereas figuring out it.

Accusing Ms. Deepa of attempting to espouse her non-public curiosity in the property over public curiosity, the Acquisition Officer urged the court docket to dismiss her writ petition difficult the award of ₹67.90 crore deposited with the City Civil Court in Chennai.

Further, answering the petitioner’s different allegation that the property had been undervalued, the officer stated the rule worth of ₹12,060 per sq.ft was adopted to find out the compensation since “the price of similar type of land situated in the nearest vicinity was not available.”

Ms. Lakshmi added: “The petitioner is blowing hot and cold at the same time by seeming to oppose the acquisition but at the same time seeking for enhanced compensation. The grounds raised by the writ petitioner are untenable.”

Though the acquisition proceedings had commenced in October 2017 a lot earlier than the petitioner and her brother J. Deepak had been declared because the authorized heirs by the High Court in May 2020, the officer stated there was no necessity to redo all the train from scratch.

Pointing out that public notices had been issued at each stage of the proceedings and {that a} public listening to was additionally performed on January 2, 2019, the officer stated Mr. Deepak too had submitted his objections however they had been rejected by the Collector on January 22, 2020.

After the siblings had been declared because the authorized heirs, notices had been issued to them below Section 21(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013 to make claims for compensation.

Ms. Deepa’s husband K. Madhavan, Mr. Deepak’s counsel S.L. Sudarsanam and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Ajay Robin Singh appeared for inquiry earlier than the Acquisition Officer on July 3, 2020 and it was claimed by the latter that Jayalalithaa had revenue tax dues.

Since there have been conflicting claims and the siblings had solely insisted on conducting the acquisition proceedings afresh as a substitute of searching for apportionment of the compensation quantity, the problem was referred to the City Civil Court and the compensation was additionally deposited over there on July 22.

Since then, “the property vests with the Government free from all encumbrances,” the Acquisition Officer claimed.