LAWS(MAD)-2017-8-50

M. THIYAGARAJAN Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI & ORS.

Decided On August 31, 2017
M. THIYAGARAJAN Appellant
V/S
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI And ORS. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the established practice to constitute a Site Selection Committee to identify and select the best location for establishment of Government Medical College and Hospital, after announcing the policy for such establishment by the Government. However, in the case of newly sanctioned Government Medical College and Hospital, at Karur, immediately after the announcement of Government decision by the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, on 12 Aug., 2014, the real estate developers at Karur took swift action and identified a site in a remote area and thereafter, purchased large extent of land on 27 Aug., 2014 and after retaining covetable portion for commercial development, gifted an irregular tale like portion, to the Director of Medical Education on 28 Aug., 2014 and with the active assistance of the District Administration and Local Officials of the Health Department, came out successful in making the Government to take the land. The then District Collector, Karur and the Joint Director of Health Department, Karur, danced to the tune of Real Estate promoters and without visiting the subject land to satisfy as to whether it was fit for the construction of Medical College building, moved very fastly and made recommendation to the Government on 29 Aug., 2014 to accept the land, without even making an attempt to identify and shortlist the other available land with locational advantages, so as to enable the Government to select the best among such sites. The Government, subsequent to the issuance of the order in G.O.(Ms). No. 352, Health and Family Welfare (E2) Department, dated 30 Nov., 2015 sanctioning funds, found that the gifted land was not at all suitable, more so, on account of the fact that the Government District Head Quarters Hospital, which was converted and declared as the Medical College Hospital, is 6 1/2 Kilometres away from the site covered under the gift deed and, therefore, took a decision to identify another suitable site with all the locational advantages and after short-listing two sites, finally decided to take the land offered by the Karur Municipality, which is very near to the existing Government Medical College Hospital at Karur. The attempt to establish the Medical College and the Hospital by taking the Municipal land is stalled by two real estate developers, who are the donors of the gifted land by filing Writ Petitions and obtaining interim orders restraining the Government from establishing the Medical College near the Government Medical College Hospital by utilizing the land allotted by the Karur Municipality. The net result is that the aspiring medical students were denied admission for the M.B.B.S. Course and the people of Karur, a full-fledged Multi-Speciality Hospital, attached to a Medical College. In short, the policy announced by the Government to establish the Medical College and Hospital at Karur and to commence the admission during the academic year 2016-2017 is stalled by the powerful real estate developers with the active assistance of all concerned who were in a dominant position to tilt the balance.

(2.) The alleged public cause projected by the donors of the land and the bona fides of the Public Interest Litigation has to be tested in the light of the observation made by the Honourable Supreme Court in Abraham T.J. Vs. The State of Karnataka [2017 (7) Scale 641] that there is no public interest in shifting a Taluk Office from the place located earlier by accepting the gift of land from public for conferring a right or cause of action for challenging the decision, even if the decision was taken by violating the conditions of gift, by which, land was donated by the public for construction of Government Office and that Writ Petition in such cases does not expose any kind of public cause.

(3.) Individual Writ Petitions: