2.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the District Collector, Salem has no authority to cancel the patta issued by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Salem, by virtue of Section 12(2) of the Tamil Nadu Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') which says that as against a decision of the Settlement Officer under sub-section (1), the Government may, within one year from the date of the decision and any person aggrieved by such decision may, within three months from the said date, appeal to the Tribunal. In the present case, when the petitioner was issued with a patta by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Salem, the fifth respondent herein, way back on 26.12.1978, the learned Tribunal alone has got the authority to examine the correctness of the order passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, but, the District Collector, Salem District, who has no power or jurisdiction to question the order passed by the fifth respondent, has wrongly cancelled the patta and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside as it has no legal sanctity or legal validity. Since the District Collector, Salem has not conducted any enquiry or not issued any notice before cancellation of patta, the petitioner and his family members were unaware of the impugned order for a quite long time.
