The Union Railway Ministry on Friday informed the Kerala High Court that as the SilverLine semi high-speed rail project was not a special railway project, the State government did not require any sanction from the Railways for conducting survey, a social impact study and land acquisition.
The submissions were made when two writ petitions filed by James Alex and others from Kottayam challenging the demarcation of boundaries of land for the project came up for hearing before Justice N. Nagaresh.
The petitioners contended that as per Section 20A of Railways Act, only the Central government and its instrumentalities were empowered to issue the notifications for the acquisition, survey, measurement and valuation of land for any special railway project.
Counsel for the Railways submitted that, in fact, it had given in-principle approval for the project which was being implemented by Kerala Rail Development Corporation Limited (K-Rail), a joint venture company between the State government and the Railway Ministry.
The Railways had a share of 49% in the company. The counsel submitted that the State government could go ahead with the survey and acquisition proceeding for the project under LARR Act (Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act), since the project was not a special one as contemplated under the Railways Act.
The State government submitted that the survey and demarcation of boundaries of land were only preliminary works ahead of land acquisition. Besides, it was not a special project of the Railways. Therefore, the provisions of the Railways Act was not applicable while implementing the project.
The petitioners contended that the special project included all railway projects, including the SilverLine. Therefore, the Central government alone was competent to issue the notifications for survey and proceeding for land acquisition. The powers under the Railways Act had not been delegated to the State government. Therefore, the orders issued by the State government for the survey and demarcation of land for the project amounted to usurping the powers of the Central government.
The petitioners sought to quash the government orders and all further proceedings initiated for the survey and land acquisition. The court reserved its order on the petitions.
