His Feudal Lordship?

• Kaverirajapuram, Tiruvallur: 450 acres. This fences in government ‘poramboke’ land and land for the landless poor.
• Tiruttani, Tiruvallur: 440 acres
• Poovalai, Vellore: 50 acres of orchards
• Modus operandi: The judge’s men fence off tracts of land and encroach upon it. When the judge was a lawyer he owned 90 acres. His land holdings went up after he became a judge in 1996.

***

However, at Kaverirajapuram village in Tiruttani taluka of Tiruvallur district, ground zero of the controversy and where Justice Dinakaran is said to possess close to 450 acres, the discussion is at an entirely different level. In this rain-fed village, just 60 km from Chennai, the controversy is being seen as not between Dalit and non-Dalit, but as between a landed Dalit and landless ones. People describe it as the case of a rich, empowered Dalit depriving poor, powerless members of his own community of designated common land. In fact, the one leading the charge against Justice Dinakaran here is V.M. Raman, a young Dalit and a native of Kaverirajapuram. The village has about 350 Dalit families and the rest of the population, nearly 2,000 members, either belong to the Irula tribe or other backward classes.

According to Raman, Justice Dinakaran began his land-purchasing spree in the village as a lawyer. “As an advocate he purchased close to 90 acres from one Daya around 1990-91, but his landholding went up dramatically after he became a judge in 1996. He now has close to 450 acres, including government land that has been progressively encroached upon over a period of time,” Raman alleges. Apparently the fenced lands of Justice Dinakaran in Kaverirajapuram include, besides his ‘patta’ (registered) land, government land or ‘poramboke’ land, under which category fall the village’s lakes, pathways, canals, streams, pastures and ‘anadhinam’ land meant for distribution only among the landless poor. Since the property is well-fenced and secured, villagers are denied access to these common properties. The fence is said to have come up in the last three years.

Raman also reels out some of the ‘patta’ numbers of the plots within the fenced area that he has accessed from the taluka office in Tiruttani: “Patta number 1372 is in the name of Justice Dinakaran; 1426 in the name of Amudam Garden, Dear Lands and Sujatha; 2345 in the name of his wife Dr Vinodini; 1427 in the name of Konan Garden; 1365 in the name of Paripoornam; 92 in the name of Krishnaveni; 990 in the name of Ashok....” Some of the names, he says, could well be benami.

Jaganathan, a landless Dalit of the village, says, “Some years ago, when we were grazing in what is clearly poramboke land, Dinakaran’s people not only chased us out, but also filed a complaint against us in the Kanakamma Chattiram police station, accusing us of stealing mangoes from his orchards. They made us sit in front of small heaps of mangoes and took pictures. Six of us were booked in the case.”

Other villagers point out that, a couple of years ago, they vehemently protested against the denial of access to grazing land and at that point Justice Dinakaran’s people had pointed to nearly 30 acres that was available to them for the purpose. But since these 30 acres are surrounded by his ‘private’ lands, the villagers had no chance of getting anywhere close to it.

The villagers say the local administration, elected representatives and the panchayat members have never come to their rescue or argued in their favour. In fact, on September 22, Indrasenan, the son of panchayat president Jayammal, accompanied by a former panchayat president, Narasimhalu, reportedly went round the village threatening people with dire consequences for having participated in a protest organised in Tiruvallur town against Justice Dinakaran’s “land-grabbing”.

Raman says, “Justice Dinakaran should have proved himself the second Dr Ambedkar, but it is unfortunate that he is treating his own people badly. After taking up this issue, I fear for my life. I also fear that false cases will be foisted against me.” Raman, who runs an organisation for children called Tallam Charitable Trust, has been seeking a plot in the village for the trust since 2005. But while denying him land, 13 acres (survey nos. 369/1 and 369/2) in the same locality was allotted to a “fictitious company”—Konan Pvt Ltd, which Raman says belongs to the judge.

Narayanan also made it clear that they were “not worried or concerned” about the Dalit identity of the judge. The Kisan Sabha has also done its homework, gathering survey numbers of government ‘poramboke’ land that has been encroached upon in the village with the exact number of acres against each of the survey numbers.

The members of the Forum for Judicial Accountability (FJA) in Chennai, who took the initiative to make a detailed representation on the disproportionate assets of Justice P.D. Dinakaran on September 9 to the SC collegium, refused to speak. But when enquiries were made about their antecedents in Chennai legal circles, it was revealed that the members of the forum were public interest lawyers appearing for the landless poor and Dalits for over a decade. “FJA members have always done credible work. In this case, they have done their job of raising questions. It is surprising that even after all this hullabaloo, Justice Dinakaran has not issued a single statement,” said a Madras High Court lawyer.

The next movement in the case will be after Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan returns from his Australia trip on September 26. The apex court collegium is expected to meet two days later. But lawyers don’t see any action being taken. Senior Supreme Court lawyer Rajeev Dhawan says, “There is no proper mechanism to investigate a judge of the higher courts. The judges only fear the collegiums that may block their elevation. Other than the collegiums, they do not care about anything.” Justice Dinakaran has also been summoned by the CJI to present his side of the case.

By Sugata Srinivasaraju in Tiruttani (TN) with Chandrani Banerjee