The petitioner sought a writ to quash an order rejecting her claim for patta issued after 35 years and directed the authorities to issue patta. The Court rejected the claim, noting that delay rendered the petition untenable.
No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 07.08.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
W.P.No.17333 of 2008
Thulasi
...Petitioner
Vs
Prayer:- The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned order dated 06.05.2008 in Letter No.K3/9417/2008, passed by the 1st respondent, quash the same and directing the first respondent to issue patta to the petitioner by considering the claim of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Neelakandan
For Respondents : Mr.D.Suryanarayanan, AGP, for R1 Mr.P.Gopalan, for R2
ORDER
Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
Pettaivaithalai, the second respondent herein and she got married to the said Sathan. Recognising their service, the Trust Board of the second respondent Temple had assigned them a land having an extent of 1.04 acre, comprised in Survey No.120-A in Pettaivaithalai Village as inam. Since then they have been in possession and enjoyment of the same.
"26. In AIR 2009 (SC) Suppl. 241 and MANU/SC/0752/2014 : AIR 2015 (SC) 102 (Supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court set aside the orders passed in exercise of the suo motu judicial power after lapse of 17 and 13 years respectively. The same view was taken by the Supreme Court in the latest decision reported in 2018 SAR Civil 360. The Rajasthan High Court in MANU/RH/1226/2015: AIR 2015 Rajasthan 179 (Supra) has gone to the extent of holding that even if the fraud is alleged, the power must not be exercised after unreasonable period, such as after several decades. In similar circumstances, the Division Bench of this Court in MANU/TN/0147/2016 : 2016 (2) L.w. 45 (Supra), rejected the prayer sought for grant of Patta after six decades. In the matter on hand, indisputably the appellant challenges issuance of patta after a lapse of 54 years.
pvs
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Special Commissioner and
Commissioner of Land Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.
2. The Executive Officer,
Mahyarujuneswarasamy Temple,
Pettaivaithalai,
Srirangam Taluk,
Tiruchirappalli District.
+1cc to Mr.R.Neelankandan, Advocate, SR.No.68754
+1cc to Mr.D.Gopalan, Advocate, SR.No.67443
+1cc to the Govt.Pleader, Vide Sr.No.68104
W.P.No.17333 of 2008
Kak(24/09/2019)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct issuance of patta despite a lapse of 35 years after the enactment of the Tamil Nadu Inam Estates Abolition Act.
Whether the principles laid down in Supreme Court and Division Bench decisions regarding time limits for patta issuance apply to the facts of this case.
Whether the Writ Petition challenging the rejection of patta claim on grounds of delay is maintainable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
J.Govindaraj and others vs. The Additional Chief SecretaryDistinguished¶20
W.P.No.2751 of 2014, J.Govindaraj and others vs. The Additional Chief Secretary
Model Education Society vs. The Principal CommissionerDistinguished¶20
W.P.Nos.21328 and 33136 of 2014, Model Education Society vs. The Principal Commissioner
Nawab Wallajah Sahib Pallivasal vs. the Commissioner of Land AdministrationRelied on¶21
Nawab Wallajah Sahib Pallivasal vs. the Commissioner of Land Administration reported in MANU/TN/1662/2019
AIR 2009 (SC) Suppl. 241Referred¶22
AIR 2009 (SC) Suppl. 241 · Who else cites this
MANU/SC/0752/2014 : AIR 2015 (SC) 102 (Supra)Referred¶22
MANU/SC/0752/2014 : AIR 2015 (SC) 102 (Supra) · Who else cites this
2018 SAR Civil 360Referred¶22
2018 SAR Civil 360
MANU/RH/1226/2015: AIR 2015 Rajasthan 179 (Supra)Referred¶22
MANU/RH/1226/2015: AIR 2015 Rajasthan 179 (Supra) · Who else cites this
MANU/TN/0147/2016 : 2016 (2) L.w. 45 (Supra)Relied on¶22
MANU/TN/0147/2016 : 2016 (2) L.w. 45 (Supra)
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Thulasi
The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration
The Executive Officer, Mahyarujuneswarasamy Temple
K.KALYANASUNDARAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
