'They Give Education' : Supreme Court Stays SASTRA University's Eviction From Thanjavur Public Land

The Supreme Court today stayed the order of the Madras High Court, which allowed the eviction of Shanmugha Arts, Science, Technology & Research Academy (SASTRA) from public land in Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu. The Court stated that due consideration has to be given to the fact that land was being used for the cause of education. 

The bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vijay Bishnoi was hearing the challenge to the Madras High Court order which dismissed a petition filed by Shanmugha Arts, Science Technology & Research Academy (SASTRA), a deemed university, challenging a government order that refused an alternate land offered by the University for setting up a prison and a subsequent eviction notice issued by the Tahsildar, Thanjavur.

Sr Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and CS Vaidyanathan (assisted by Advocate Ronak Shankar Agarwal), appearing for SASTRA, mainly stressed that the petitioners had made 3 offers of alternative land to the State for executing its open-air prison project. The petitioners also stressed that the State tried to take possession when the campus houses over 5000 female students, and was concerned about their safety. 

Sr Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu, submitted that if the petitioners' case is allowed, then every other encroacher of the public land would make the same argument and ask the government to take alternative land instead. 

The CJI, however, pointed out that in the present case, the land was being used for promoting education, which is on a different footing than a commercial site. 

"Had it been a case of a factory or a commercial institution, we could have appreciated that you know - you have already made money out of an illegally encroached land. They (petitioners) are an  (educational) institution." 

He further added, "They are giving you three options; as a state, you should also promote educational institutions. How many states have been able to establish educational institutions?

In this light, Dwivedi submitted that the petitioners can send a new proposal for the state's consideration.

The Court proceeded to pass the following order, allowing the petitioner to pitch fresh compensation proposals and directed status quo on the subject land. 

"We therefore permit the petitioners to submit a fresh proposal to the State Government with respect to all three options. We expect the state of Tamil Nadu to consider the three options sympathetically and take an appropriate decision by ensuring that no (inaudible) is caused to the public." 

The Court added that a High Powered Committee can consider the proposal of the petitioners. It further stated, " pending such exercise, the institution shall be allowed to carry out its activities without any hindrances." 

Before The High Court

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan noted that the government had decided to develop a prison in the government land where the university was encroaching.

The court also noted that the issues involved in the plea had already been litigated and the court could not interfere with the policy decision of the government by paving way for encroachers to re-litigate the issue.

The university had encroached on Government land measuring 31.37 acres situated in Thirumalaisamuthiram Village, Thanjavur District in the year 1985. The land was government land allotted to the Prison Department of Government for establishing an open air jail. However, since the university was encroaching on the land, the prison department could not develop the open air jail.

The Government then initiated eviction proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. Final notice was issued and opportunity was provided to the university to voluntarily evict the superstructure made by it in the Government land.

The university challenged the eviction proceedings through writ proveedings which were dismissed, granting liberty to the university to file statutory appeal under the Act. Following this, the university filed statutory appeal before the RDO, Thanjavur which was dismissed. A review petition was filed before the District Revenue Officer where the matter was remitted back to the Tahsildar for fresh inquiry. After enquiry, the Tahsildar dismissed the plea. An appeal against the plea was also dismissed. The second review before the Special Commissioner and Commissiner of Land Administration was also dismissed.

The university also initiated writ proceedings, in which a direction was issued to assign the encroached land to the University. The government preferred an appeal wherein the Revenue Department was directed to evict the university from the encroached premises. The university's request offering an alternate land in lieu of the encroached portion of the land was rejected. Though the university preferred an SLP, it was dismissed granting liberty to the university to seek appropriate remedy before appropriate forum.

Based on this liberty, the University again submitted a representation to the State requesting an alternate land. This request was rejected, and an eviction notice was issued which was challenged before the High Court. 

The plea was filed with the help of AOR EC Agarwala. 

Case Details : SHANMUGHA ARTS SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH ACADEMY (SASTRA) vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU| SLP(C) No. 002359 - 002360 / 2026