The Supreme Court of India has advised the Tamil Nadu government to contemplate alternative land provisions instead of proceeding with the eviction of SASTRA University from government-owned land at its Thanjavur campus. This suggestion arose during a session on Monday where the university’s legal challenge against a Madras High Court decision was under review. The High Court had previously directed the university’s removal from approximately 31 acres of land designated for an open-air jail.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, presided over the hearing. They emphasized that the court’s stance is not to overlook the university’s conduct but is influenced by the educational purpose the land currently serves. “If the land was utilized for a resort, commercial complex, or any illicit activity, eviction would have been immediate,” remarked CJI Surya Kant, highlighting the significance of the academic use of the land.
The Tamil Nadu government, however, resisted this accommodation, presenting a strong opposition based on the prolonged history of encroachment by the university and the potential precedent it might set for other encroachment cases. State representatives provided data indicating a progressive increase in the university’s occupancy from 1985 to 2025 and argued that the alternative land proposed by SASTRA University was unsuitable due to issues related to location, accessibility, and lack of contiguous space.
The legal conflict has a long history, with the Madras High Court previously rejecting SASTRA’s request for land assignment or exchange and upholding the state’s eviction notice. The High Court’s ruling emphasized that the acceptance of alternative land is a governmental discretion, not a right. Following this, SASTRA University escalated the matter to the Supreme Court.
In the current deliberation, the Supreme Court questioned whether demolishing the university’s existing structures was essential for the state’s open-air jail project. “We are assessing the state’s conduct alongside the university’s. Our evaluation does not condone any misconduct,” stated CJI Surya Kant.
The Supreme Court proposed that the state could identify a suitable parcel for the open-air jail, with the university potentially bearing the costs. The court insisted that any resolution should fully address the state’s project requirements and clarified that the alternative site should not be adjacent to the educational institution.
Further, the CJI underscored that any arrangement must ensure Tamil Nadu incurs no financial losses or territorial concessions. Nonetheless, the state government argued that accepting such terms could inadvertently endorse encroachment.
