Tamil Nadu
,
Chitlapakkam
,
Kanchipuram
Published :
Aug 2022
|
Updated :
Eviction drive on Chitlapakkam lake in Tamil Nadu leads to protests by residents
Reported by
Hariprasad Radhakrishnan
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
403
Households affected
People affected
2017
Year started
34
Land area affected
403
Households affected
People Affected
2017
Year started
34
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Encroachment by Non-Right Holders (Other than Caste-based)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Encroachment by Non-Right Holders (Other than Caste-based)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
1
Summary

Residents have been protesting the demolition of encroachments in Chitlapakkam lake, where the clearance drive kicked off in January, 2022. Officials suspended the clearance of encroachments after protesters staged a road blockade.

The latest clearance drive on the Chitlapakkam lake was prompted by a Madras High Court order passed in 2022, in response to a public interest litigation filed by anti-corruption NGO Arappor Iyakkam in 2019. The Madras HC has also issued orders for the removal of encroachments from water bodies in its previous judgements passed in 2007 and 2015.

In 2017, the district administration removed 12 non residential encroachments from the lake. A few religious structures including temples, a mosque and a church were also demolished. In 2019, Chitlapakkam Rising, a local NGO that has been working to restore the lake, organised volunteers to conduct a cleanliness drive of the lake to fight water scarcity. The NGO’s campaign for a government desilting project bore fruit later that year when the Chief Minister earmarked Rs. 25 crore for the project. Following a High Court order that made its “zero-tolerance policy” towards encroachment of water bodies, the Public Works Department started issuing eviction notices to the encroachers. However, the eviction did not take place immediately due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

In April 2021, the Tamil Nadu government informed the Madras High Court that it had identified 403 encroachments on Chitlapakkam lake and issued notices to all of them. Of the total encroachments, 374 are house sites. In July 2021, the HC ordered the removal of all encroachments. However, the government failed to meet this deadline due to the lockdown imposed during the Covid-19 pandemic. In January 2022, the government relaunched the encroachment removal drive on the Chitlapakkam lake. but only managed to remove 74 so far.

It may be noted that despite only a section of the encroachments being removed, the government submitted in the HC that all of them, except a school, had been cleared. However, an RTI reply accessed by the Times of India, showed that only 74 encroachments had been removed. Following this, the government filed an affidavit stating that the previous submission had an inadvertent error.

Sunil Jayaram, the founder of Chitlapakkam Rising, told LCW that the residents, who have been labeled encroachers, have been living in the area for the past 50-60 years. "They feel that the eviction is taking place in a biased manner. They find it unfair that some of their neighbours have received pattas but they haven't. Meanwhile, the government continues to flout the law by building police stations and other facilities on water bodies. Only the houses of those who have accepted alternative accommodation have been demolished so far," he said. Following protests, the Water Resources Department has put the demolition drive on hold.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for rehabilitation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

25

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2019

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Water Resources Department, Revenue Department, Public Works Department, Police Department

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Hariprasad Radhakrishnan

Hariprasad is a Tamil Nadu-based independent journalist who writes primarily on environmental and developmental issues. He has worked for and contributed to a number of leading publications. He can often be seen playing chess or struggling to learn the keyboard.

Show more work
Latest updates
Nagaon
Assam

Farmers in Assam resist land acquisition for solar plant, beaten by police

Surat
Gujarat

Surat farmers claim fertile land re-included in Gujarat's development plan without consent

Gadchiroli
Maharashtra

Villagers in Gadchiroli campaign to shut down Surjagarh iron ore mine

Biswanath
Assam

Encroachment, land dispute pose threat to newly designated Behali Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam

Krishnagiri
Tamil Nadu

Residents in Krishnagiri protest against takeover of land by SIPCOT

Lower Siang
Arunachal Pradesh

Tension in Arunachal's Lower Siang over Likabali-Durpai road project amid boundary disputes

Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu revives plan to construct Kanyakumari Port despite protests by fisherfolk

Koraput
Odisha

Bauxite mining at Mali Parbat in Koraput seeks to displace and disrupt local livelihoods

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for rehabilitation

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us