The principle of promissory estoppel binds authorities to uphold previous assurances, ensuring fairness in public decision-making, particularly in land acquisition matters.

ORDER :

(N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.)

This a petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India challenging a notice dated 26.9.2024 issued by the second respondent - the Chennai Metro Rail Limited (CMRL) under Sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the TAMIL NADU ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES ACT , 1997 (for short, the Act), calling upon the petitioner to show cause within 30 days as to why the property situated at T.S.No.329/2 measuring an extent of 837 sq.meters should not be acquired.

2. The challenge arises in the backdrop of the following facts:

(i) M/s.United India Insurance Company Limited - the petitioner has constructed a new head office, which has the unique feature of having double curvature profile both vertically and horizontally and it is the first of its kind in terms of a structural steel diagrid construction. The building consists of 14 floors with sufficient parking space and the total built up area is approximately 25,000 sq.meters.

(ii) The petitioner has obtained three-star green building certification. Such construction was put up after getting necessary approval from the fourth respondent namely the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) and since this construction was put up within 50-meter radius of the route map of Phase II of the project of the CMRL, a no objection certificate (NOC) was also obtained from the CMRL before the CMDA granted approval.

(iii) Initially, a decision was taken to have an entry/exit point of the Metro Station within the premises of Arul Mighu Sri Rathina Vinayagar and Durgai Amman Temple, Whites Road, Chennai-14 (hereinafter referred to as the temple). At that stage, a public interest litigation (PIL) was instituted before this Court in W.P.No.18163 of 2024, pursuant to which, the entry and exit point of the Metro Station was proposed to be shifted to the other side of the road at the entrance tower inside the United India Insurance Company Building.

(iv) It appears that the said PIL before the First Bench was disposed on the basis of an undertaking given by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CMRL that the entry/exit point of the Metro Station would be shifted to the site of the petitioner. On the basis of the said undertaking, the said PIL was disposed on 08.8.2024 and the impugned notice has, thereafter, been issued by the CMRL on 26.9.2024. It is, however, an admitted fact that the petitioner was not even made a party nor was heard before orders were passed in WP.No.18163 of 2024.

3. Respondents 2 and 3 have filed a counter affidavit wherein they took a stand that the reasons given by the fifth respondent were considered, that a decision was taken to change the alignment plan, that the proposal was submitted before the First Bench of this Court, that it was recorded and that thereafter, the said PIL was disposed of by order dated 08.8.2024. According to them, pursuant to that, a revised land plan schedule was prepared by the Technical Wing of the CMRL and thereafter, the public notice was published in the local dailies on 27.9.2024 in Form B under Section 3(2) of the Act proposing to acquire an extent of 837 sq.meters