Govt buildings on waterbodies also encroachments: HC

Madurai: All building, including govt buildings, on the waterbodies should be considered as encroachments, Madras high court observed while hearing a plea challenging the eviction proceeding from a waterbody in Pudukkottai district.The court dismissed the plea filed by Palaniyandi challenging a notice issued by the authorities to evict him from a property on a waterbody in Pudukkottai district. The petitioner had also urged the authorities to provide alternative accommodation for him.A division bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice B Pugalendhi observed that it is beyond dispute that the land has been classified as a waterbody. Therefore, the court is not inclined to interfere with the eviction proceedings.The judges took note of the contention of the petitioner's counsel that govt buildings have also been constructed on the land, and said there cannot be any selective targeting of the private buildings only. If it is a waterbody, no building or construction, including govt building, can come up there. We make it clear that the encroachments in the waterbody would include the govt buildings too, they said.Taking into account that the petitioner had built a house, the judges granted four months' time for him to make alternative arrangements. The petitioner may file an application before the district collector for alternative accommodation under any relevant scheme. The collector shall consider and provide the same if the petitioner is eligible, the judges said. Madurai: All building, including govt buildings, on the waterbodies should be considered as encroachments, Madras high court observed while hearing a plea challenging the eviction proceeding from a waterbody in Pudukkottai district.The court dismissed the plea filed by Palaniyandi challenging a notice issued by the authorities to evict him from a property on a waterbody in Pudukkottai district. The petitioner had also urged the authorities to provide alternative accommodation for him.A division bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice B Pugalendhi observed that it is beyond dispute that the land has been classified as a waterbody. Therefore, the court is not inclined to interfere with the eviction proceedings.The judges took note of the contention of the petitioner's counsel that govt buildings have also been constructed on the land, and said there cannot be any selective targeting of the private buildings only. If it is a waterbody, no building or construction, including govt building, can come up there. We make it clear that the encroachments in the waterbody would include the govt buildings too, they said.Taking into account that the petitioner had built a house, the judges granted four months' time for him to make alternative arrangements. The petitioner may file an application before the district collector for alternative accommodation under any relevant scheme. The collector shall consider and provide the same if the petitioner is eligible, the judges said.