News
Two estate workers claim Minister has usurped their new homes
Two Hill Country Tamils have petitioned the Court of Appeal that they were maliciously deprived of new houses by Hill Country and New Villages Minister Palani Digambaram and others after their old line rooms were destroyed by fire. They state that the houses–built with their involvement in a joint effort led by the Plantation Human Development Trust (PHDT)–were meant to replace the rooms they lost. Despite being on the beneficiary list, the new abodes have been reallocated to two persons who had campaigned at elections for the Minister, the petitioners say.
The PHDT is a company and tripartite organisation comprising Government, regional plantation companies (RPCs) and plantation trade unions that carries out infrastructure and social development in the sector, among other public functions. Petitioner Nadaraj Palavinthan and wife Paramanathan Jeyalatchumi are workers at the Brunswick Estate in Maskeliya. They have two children aged six and four. Petitioner Kumaresan Sripriya and husband D Kumaresan are also from the same estate. Now pregnant, Mrs. Kumarasan has two children aged five and two.
The petitioners lived in colonial-age line rooms for several years (in the case of Mrs Kumaresan, the past 24 years). Mr Palavinthan shared his unit with his parents while Mrs Kumaresan’s parents were in hers. Each room was approximately 10 square feet with a small verandah and common toilets. The residents secured electricity and did improvements with personal funds.
In January last year, 16 of these rooms caught fire due to an electrical fault. The petitioners’ units were also destroyed. Twenty-one families occupied those rooms at the time of the incident. The displaced were in 16 temporary huts in the aftermath of the disaster. Mr Palavinthan’s family, his parents and siblings (eight persons) were in one hut. Mrs Kumaresan’s family, mother and siblings (eight persons) were in another. The PHDT and the Ceylon Workers’ Red Flag Union (RFU) provided roofing sheets while the plantation management gave space for the huts.
Minister Digambaram visited the line rooms seven days after the fire. The families were notified by National Union of Wokers’ (NUW) officials that 25 new replacement houses were to be built. The four extra ones were to be given to three NUW representatives and a worker whose roof was removed to prevent the fire from spreading. None of their rooms was flattened by the disaster, the petition states. The Chairperson of the PHDT is advisor to the NUW of which Minister Digambaram is President.
In May 2016, lots were drawn to allocate land to each family and boundaries were separated. The NUW Coordinating Secretary informed them that, as part of the process of receiving a new house, they would have to assist and contribute labour. The petitioners state they duly did this.
Mr Palavinthan drew lot number 15 and Mrs Kamaresan drew lot number 2. They were instructed to dig out the ground to lay the foundation. The former did this himself. The latter paid a labourer to have it done as her husband was in Colombo at the time. She later spent money to colourwash the house allotted to her. They also helped to unload building material and ensure that sewage pits were dug.
But in March this year, a construction supervisor barred them from assisting in the building of their houses saying their names were off the beneficiaries list. In response to a letter from the RFU, Brunswick Estate management advised that this be taken up with the Ministry of Hill Country and PHDT as the decision had been theirs.
Meanwhile, the NUW Coordinating Secretary informed Mr Palavinthan he would be given his house only if he joined that union. The RFU wrote to the PHDT for further clarification. And the PHDT replied that the names of the petitioners remained on the beneficiaries list forwarded to it by the management.
But in May 2017, when electricity forms were distributed, the petitioners were not given any. Nor were they permitted to pay Rs 500 towards the issuance of deeds. A welfare officer told petitioners to consult a PHDT area representative named Nathan.
The petitioners filed complaints at the Maskeliya police station saying electricity forms were not issued to them. But Mr Nathan informed them their names remained on the beneficiaries list despite “political interference”.
After extensive inquiry, the petitioners discovered their houses were to be reallocated to two others who did not work at the estate, who had their own houses and whose rooms had not been destroyed in the fire. It is known to the petitioners that they had campaigned for Mr Digambaram during previous elections, the petitions state. “Hence, the petitioners believe that these houses are given to them in return for their political support,” they assert.
On May 27, Minister Digambaram was chief guest at the opening ceremony for the houses. The petitioners found their names pasted on houses bearing lot number 9 and 24 but were not given their keys.
After the ceremony, RFU union representatives asked the Minister why the petitioners were not handed their keys. He replied that they were “involved in protests and that they should not participate in protests in the future and then the houses will be given to them”.
The petitioners later gave media interviews saying they were deprived of their houses despite having spent time, effort and money constructing them. Letters of demand requesting that the houses with associated lot numbers be transferred to them have not borne fruit.
They now seek an interim order preventing a handover of their houses to anyone but them until the matter is heard and determined by the Court. They also seek a Writ of Certiorari to quash any decision to deny or prevent them from receiving their houses; and a Writ of Mandamus, compelling a handover of the respective houses to the petitioners.
The case is listed for notice on Sept. 12.