Demolition move a political vendetta: Vijayakanth

Chennai, Nov 11: Actor turned politician and Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK) Founder President Vijayakanth has alleged that the Union Road Transport Shipping and Highways Ministry was attempting to demolish the' Andal Azhagar Marriage Hall' owned by him on the busy 100 feet broad road at Koyambedu in the city in the name of constructing a flyover at Koyambedu junction.

Mr Vijayakanth told newspersons here yesterday that ''before the Assembly election, Union Minister for Road Transport Shipping and Highways T R Baalu told that there was no plan to demolish the marriage hall, but later, Mr Baalu told that if i give him an alternative plan, the Ministry would reconsider the plan to demolish the marriage hall.'' He said as suggested by Mr Baalu, he submitted an alternative plan with the help of retired Chief Project Coordinator of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA), which suggested construction of a road passing near the marriage hall and not the fly over.

But now after the recent elections to the state Assembly and the local bodies, the department had rejected his alternative plan without citing any reasons, he charged.

He said earlier, the Highways Department had changed its plan while laying the I T Corridor near Madhya Kailash in Adyar area in the city without demolishing the temple there.

He alleged that the current move to demolish the marriage hall was a political vendetta against his party, which was growing day by day.

Mr Vijayakanth said he would not take up the issue either before the Court or on the floor of the state Assembly. ''But I will take up the issue before the people,'' he added. He said the people, who were behind this conspiracy, were politically strong. ''One day things will change,'' he said.

Earlier, rumours spread that the marriage hall would be spared after Mr Vijayakanth called on DMK President M Karunanidhi, prior to the May Assembly elections.

Giving details of the acquisition process, Mr Baalu told newspersons recently that Mr Vijayakanth initially did not object to the demolition plan when his Ministry issued the 'intention to acquire' notice in August 2005.

When the Divisional Revenue Officer (DRO) followed up the notice and issued a notification under 3(G) of the National Highways Act, a lawyer appeared on behalf of Mr Vijayakanth and submitted an alternative plan under which the marriage hall could be spared.

However, the plan was technically not feasible and did not meet the IRC standards, Mr Balu said, adding that the structure would be brought down for constructing the fly-over.

UNI