HC quashes Chennai Metro's notice to PSU insurance company

Madras, The Madras heights margaret court on tues quashed a note issued by the Chennai Metro Rail Limited , calling upon the United India Insurance Company Limited in the city to show cause within 30 days as to why its property measuring an extent of 837 sq meters should not be acquired for its project. Justice N Anand Venkatesh quashed the notice dated September 26, 2024 while allowing a petition filed by United India Insurance Company, which challenged the notice issued by CMRL proposing to acquire a portion of its property. According to the petitioner, originally, the CMRL proposed to construct its metro station at a temple at Whites Road in the city. However, on a PIL filed by M/s Aalayam Kaapom Foundation, it changed its proposal and gave an undertaking before the First bench of this court to have its revised plan and thereafter, issued the present notice. The judge said it will be open to the CMRL to proceed with its original intended plan forthwith by having the Metro Station within the premises of Arul Mighu Sri Rathina Vinayagar and Durgai Amman Temple, Whites Road, Chennai-14. "Though this is an eminently fit case to impose exemplary costs, this court desists from doing so in the hope that the State and the 5th respondent realize the true meaning of the words of Swami Vivekananda that “the highest aim of religion is to unite mankind and serve humanity", the judge added. In its order, the judge said this court has no hesitation in concluding that the impugned notice was vitiated as it offends Article 14 of the Constitution by violating the principle of promissory estoppel. The illegality was compounded by the fact that the notice was a fait accompli to effectuate a statement made before the First Bench of the court in the PIL filed by the Aalayam Kaapom Foundation , to which, the petitioner was not a party and there was a gross failure of natural justice at all levels, the judge added. The judge said, "To top it all, the fact that the CMRL has chosen to change the location solely on account of the proceedings in the PIL would show that it was not moved by paramount considerations of public safety, convenience and other technical factors, but by what was said and done in a joint inspection conducted by the First Bench of this Court". The judge said this court was convinced that it would be completely contrary to public interest to tear down a building/or portions thereof of a recently constructed structure put up at a cost of ₹200 crore by a public sector entity, after obtaining all clearances and the NOC from the CMRL and that too on the basis of a proceeding held completely behind its back. To permit such an exercise by the CMRL would be an egregious fraud on the power of acquisition and would be so grossly unfair and arbitrary that it deserves the label “abuse of power” under Article 14 of the Constitution. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

---