Slides                                   

 

Court rules acquisition of property by PNC Govt was unlawful
--$27M property to be returned to judge
By George Barclay
JUSTICE Jainarayan Singh, whose $27M property at 272-273 Lamaha Street, North Cummingsburg, was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act in 1980 for the building of public offices that never materialised, had his property restored to him yesterday.

This happened after Chief Justice Mr. Carl Singh, who heard arguments from attorney-at-law Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan representing the applicant Justice Jainarayan Singh, and Attorney General Mr. Doodnauth Singh, Senior Counsel (in person) representing the State, found that the acquisition of the property in 1980 by the then Ministry of Public Works, was unconstitutional and unlawful.

When the new Government came into power in 1992, an attempt was made by the applicant to have the Acquisition Order revoked.

The Constitutional matter, which came up for hearing last year, concluded yesterday when the Chief Justice delivered his ruling.

The Chief Justice granted:-
· A declaration that the purported acquisition of the said property by an order of the said Minister of Works and Transport purporting to act under the Acquisition of Lands for Public Purposes Act Chapter 62:05 is unconstitutional, ultra vires, null, void and of no legal effect.

· A declaration that the purported annotation on the Transport No. 2855 of 1968, by the Registrar of Deeds in favour of the government of Guyana for the said property is unconstitutional, ultra vires, null, void and of no legal effect;

· A declaration that the said property so acquired was never used for the purpose of the public works for which it was acquired;

· A declaration that the purposes for which the said property was acquired not having been fulfilled in whole or in part, the said property remains in the ownership of the applicant herein;

· A declaration that transport numbered 28 of 1968, for the said property remains valid and effective;

· A declaration that it is a condition precedent to the vesting of the property purported to be acquired as aforesaid that the conditions set out in sections 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9 of the Acquisition of Lands for Purposes Act, Chapter 65:02 must be fulfilled strictissmi juris”.


The applicant, Justice Jainarayan, had said in support of his motion, “I bought the said property from the executor and beneficiaries in accordance with the terms of the Last Will and Testament of Elizabeth Bhagwandai Singh, deceased, Probate whereof as granted to Hardut Singh on the 14th October, 1976, No. 685 of 1976.

“That I was born and grew up on the said property and I have been in continuous occupation of the said property from 1979 to the present.

“That during the period of my occupation before and after I entered into the said abovementioned agreements of sale, I carried out extensive and costly repairs to the building thereon, which was in dilapidated condition when I moved in with my family in 1979.

“That since 1980, I have paid and am still paying all the rates and taxes for the said property.

“That before I could obtain transport for the said property, the then government, through its Minister of Works, made Order No. 86 of 1980, under the Acquisition of Lands for Public Purposes Act on the 24th September, 1980 with respect to the said property.

“That according to the said Order which is cited as the Acquisition of Lands for Public Purposes (Government Offices) Order 1980, the said property was to be used for the proposed construction of Government Offices, described as ‘a public work’.

“That since the said Order was made, an annotation was put on Transport No. 2855/68, but no action has to date been taken to use the property for the ‘public work’ for which it was acquired by the Government, as was stated in the Order.

“That in the meantime, 19 years have elapsed and the building has again deteriorated and is in urgent need of repairs, and I do verily believe that the government no longer has any intention of using the said property for any public work aforesaid, i.e. the proposed construction of Government Offices as specified in the said Order No. 86 of 1980.”