Elston land acquisition: Heavy loss to exchequer

KALPETTA: The whopping rise in the value of the 8.02 acres of land (3.276 hectares)acquired from Elston Tea Estate for the Kalpetta by-pass road in 1996 is a classic example of how the government loses large sums of money through legal wrangles in various land acquisition cases. The land acquisition officer awarded an amount of Rs 24,79,262 including statutory benefits for the land —  acquired in 1996 — fixing the value at Rs 2,106 per cent, to the plot owner. Interestingly, between acquisition and awarding of compensation, the ownership of the plantation changed. The 1,764.67 acres of land was sold for an amount of Rs 6 crore (Rs 340/cent). Later, the new owner, armed with a power of attorney, approached the Sub Court, Sulthan Bathery, for higher compensation for the land citing that the land is commercially significant as it is close to Kalpetta town. In a verdict the court increased the value of the land to Rs 4,000 per cent in 2002, awarding an additional amount of Rs 16,23,077.80 for the owner, increasing the total liability to the government to Rs 50 lakh. Against the verdict both state government and the possessor approached the High Court. The High Court in May 2010 hiked the compensation by Rs 9,600 per cent. The compensation amount alone touched Rs 77, 66,400. According to a communication between Adv K J Shaju, who appeared for the state at Sub Court, Sulthan Bathery, and the office of the State Public Information Officer at the office of the Advocate General, with the hike in the compensation by the High Court the total loss to the state exchequer reached Rs 3 crore, that too for a narrow strip of land of the estate.Now the legal wrangle has reached the Supreme Court. The counsel of the state government failed to convince the High Court on the real status of the land which is a plantation.A plantation land could not be treated as a commercial plot as using the land for any purpose other than plantation is violation of Kerala Land Reforms Act and Kerala Land Utilisation Act, it was pointed out.