SC Bench stays acquisition till Oct. 1 on residents’objections

The Supreme Court directed the Urban Development Authority (UDA) to maintain the status quo till October 1, with regard to a seven acre block of prime land in the Kompannaveediya area, without taking further steps to acquire the land for a development project which an Indian company is to undertake.

A Bench comprising Justices Shiranee Thilakawardena, K. Sripavan and E. Wanasundara made this direction.

After hearing counsel appearing for the residents, the Court decided to fully inquire into the alleged rights violations of the group of residents living in the land located in Kompannaveediya covering the area of Malay Street, Justice Akbar Mawatha, Java Place and Masjidul Jamiyar Mawatha, due to the proposed acquisition of this particular land.

Appearing for the residents Counsel Sujeewa Senasinghe with Farman Cassim told court neither the around 500 families who are residents of the seven acre prime land in Kompannaveediya nor the general public would be benefited by the "Redevelopment of Slave Island Area", project of the UDA but the Indian company - Tata Housing Development Company - would get the land free for development. Counsel told court that the residents were served with notice initially on December 29, 2010 issued by the UDA stating that it initiated a re-development project for the Slave Island area and has decided to have a dialogue with the residents to brief them on the project concept.

Counsel further said the UDA had informed the residents they would be relocated in an area called 'Weligodawatta' in Thotalanga, and the land in Compannaveediya would be cleared and taken over by the UDA for the alleged redevelopment project. Counsel told court the views of the petitioners or the residents were never consulted by the respondents, including the UDA, at a number of meetings.

Counsel further said the residents of the affected area were told that first they would be moved out and paid a monthly sum of Rs. 10,000 to Rs.25,000 depending on the floor area of the houses they were occupying and their land would then be cleared by demolishing all the houses and buildings.

According to counsel the land would be given to the Tata Housing Development Company free of charge to construct an apartment complex using a portion of the land and the remaining portion used by the Tata Company for business activities.

Counsel also alleged that seventh respondent Shamraz Yehiya who is a business tycoon and local agent of the Tata Company but not a UDA official was seen negotiating terms on behalf of the Tata company at the discussions.Counsel argued although the land was said to be required for a public purpose, the proposed re-development project was in reality a commercial business project.

Counsel also argued the Company would not advance the lives of the residents to be moved out by any means. They would only lose their livelihood and the education of their children would be interrupted since most of the business places and schools are located within the area, which is to be acquired.

The petitioners sought a court declaration that the notice issued under Section 2 of the Land Acquisition Act, to acquire their lands null and void.

Senior State Counsel N. Dayaratne for the 1st to 3rd respondents, Colombo Divisional Secretary K.G. Dharmathilake, Lands Minister Janaka Bandara Tennekoon and the UDA, respectively. Sanjeeva Jayawardena appeared for the Defence Secretary and the UDA Chairman.

The hearing was fixed for October 1.