Under court pressure, Bengal mulls highway action

1. Calcutta high court judge had directed the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to ensure free movement of vehicles on the expressway, part of National Highway 2, on which Trinamool supporters are squatting since last Sunday to press their demand for the return of 400 acres to farmers who do not wish to give up their land for the factory.
2. According to a Supreme court directive, acquired land cannot be returned to owners. Instead it has to be used for the public interest. And, if in any case, it cannot be used for the public interest, then the land has to be auctioned. But giving the land back to the farmers is not possible.
3. The Supreme Court had given a clear verdict in this regard, which says, a piece of land cannot be returned to its previous owner once it has been acquired. Even if the acquired land could not be used for the purpose it was intended to, it must be used for purposes related to public interest. Excess land, if any, may be auctioned by the government to the highest bidder. These directives are stated in the verdicts against civil appeals No. 6456 and 4113 of years 1999 and 2000 respectively. In a case between the state of Kerala versus N Bhaskar Pillai and others, the question emerged, “whether the government can assign the land to the erstwhile owner.” The Supreme Court in its verdict in 2004 said, “It is a settled law that if the land is acquired for a public purpose, after the public purpose was achieved, the rest of the land could be used for any other public purpose. In case there is not other public purpose for which the land is needed, then instead of disposal by way of sale to the erstwhile owners the land should be put to public auction, and the amount fetched through the public auction can be better utilised for the public purpose envisaged in the directive principles of the Constitution.”