Notice to government on Jaya’s burial site

The plea, as an interim measure, has also sought for a direction to restrain the state from constructing a memorial for the former chief minister at the spot. A division bench comprising Justice M Sathyanarayanan and Justice N Seshasayee, before whom the PIL moved by an advocate S Doraisamy, came up for hearing on Monday, said, “In the light of the grounds raised by the petitioner in the affidavit, the writ petition is admitted and notice to the authorities concerned returnable by August 18, 2017.” 

Doraisamy in his plea submitted that by applying Section 321 (4) of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act the disposal of Jayalalithaa’s body in an unregistered and unlicensed place is in utter violation of the provisions of the Act. He also noted that though a licence can be granted only after a plan of the place is registered and even assuming that permission is granted, it is not valid since at the time of Jayalalithaa’s death there was no Municipal Council to pass a resolution to grant the said permission. Moreover, the construction of any permanent structure on the beach is prohibited by the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notification issued in 2011. Unless the licence of consent is obtained from the State Coastal Zone Management Authority, no construction can be raised within 500 metres from the high tide line, Doraisamy contended. Also, the petitioner, while referring to the judgment in the disproportionate wealth case submitted, “The burial of Jayalalithaa’s body on the Marina beach is against public morality, as she had been found guilty of corrupt practices. No convict should be given state honour. Moreover, the burial has been done illegally and against the CRZ.”

Even as Chennai is reeling under acute water shortage, the Madras High Court on Monday refused to grant urgent hearing on a plea seeking to direct the state government to send a High Level Official delegation to negotiate with the government of Andhra Pradesh to secure at least 5 tmc of Krishna water for Chennai city.

Advocate AP Suryaprakasam, who moved the plea, sought the division bench comprising Justice M Sathyanarayanan and Justice N Seshasayee to take up the PIL filed by him for urgent hearing. But the bench made it clear that it will be heard in the routine course. The plea, on citing the agreement entered between Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, said Andhra Pradesh is supposed to release 12 tmc of water from Kandaleru reservoir between July and October and 4 tmc between January and April to Tamil Nadu every year. But, now, in view of the good monsoon in Krishna basin the Srisailam dam is almost full. “If the state government takes effective steps to convince Andhra Pradesh government to release at least 5 tmc of  water to Chennai in the Sai Ganga Canal, which caters to the drinking water needs in Chennai city, it will alleviate the human suffering prevailing here for want of adequate drinking water,” he said.

Turning on judge’s letter on a barely four-year-old bridge on Cauvery River virtually falling apart into a public interest lawsuit, the Madras High Court on Monday sought the government’s stand on the state of affairs involving the execution of public projects.

The letter was written by Justice N Kirubakaran to the Chief Justice referring to recent media reports of the precarious condition of the bridge across Cauvery with one of its pillars “hanging in the air without any support.” Expressing shock and surprise over the extensive damages suffered by the bridge built by Tamil Nadu Public Works Department in Erode-Namakkal districts, the judge posed a slew of probing questions to the government and requested the Chief Justice to take up his letter as a suo motu petition. The present incident (bridge) “is only the tip of the iceberg as to how the public projects are being executed defectively and negligently,” he said referring to some specific instances of cracks and damage to some recently built court buildings, including the one in Tiruchy. Treating Justice Kirubakaran’s letter as a public interest lawsuit, a division bench of justices M Sathyanarayanan and N Seshasayee on Monday issued notice to the state government returnable by six weeks.

The Madras High Court has been moved seeking a direction to the Union Ministries of Home Affairs, Health and Family Planning and Human Resources Development to complete the procedures for obtaining Presidential assent for the two bills seeking exemption for Tamil Nadu from NEET.

A division bench comprising Justice M Sathyanarayanan and Justice N Seshasayee, before whom the plea came up, adjourned the case for further hearing to July 28. State Platform for Common School System, general secretary, P B Prince Gajendra Babu, in his plea submitted that the state exercising its Legislative authority passed the Tamil Nadu Admission to MBBS and BDS Courses Act, 2017 and Tamil Nadu Admission to Post Graduate Courses in Medicine and Dentistry Act, 2017, unanimously. On obtaining Governor’s assent, both the bills were sent for Presidential assent as early as February 2017. But, even after a lapse of five months the Union Ministry of Home affairs is yet to place these bills for the consideration of the President. Even the President’s office has responded to a letter from a Member of Parliament that no such bills have been received from the Ministry of Home affairs. Stating that the urban as well as rural poor have no access, time and resources for intensive coaching for facing the exams like NEET, the petitioner said, “For lack of access and equality in opportunities the really deserving, intelligent and meritorious students are kept out of the race.”