Claims for revenue mutation and protection of possession rested on fraudulently procured ryotwari pattas over Government lands. The court held that the Assistant Settlement Officer lacked authority to grant the pattas after concluded settlement proceedings and dismissed all writ appeals, confirming dismissal of the writ petitions.
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.
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 24.03.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008 and 317 of 2009 and
M.P(MD)Nos.2 of 2009, 1, 1, 1, 1 of 2008, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 of 2009 and
C.M.P(MD)No.10533 of 2018
R.Mani Ambalam ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.618 of 2009 P.Rajakumari ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.718 of 2008 D.Srinivasan ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.323 of 2009 1.K.P.Mohanasundaram 2. M.Kavitha ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.332 of 2011 Natarajan Chettiar ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.324 of 2009 Arumuga Udayar ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.325 of 2009 Kaspar ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No.703 of 2008 S.Chellakannu ... Petitioner in WA(MD)Nos.697,698, 700 & 701 of 2008 S.Sivaraj ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No. 299of 2013 Sheik Abdullah ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No. 316of 2009 Chellakannu Rawther ... Petitioner in WA(MD)No. 317of 2009
1/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
... Respondents in WA(MD)No. 323 of 2009
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sivangangai
2/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
Sivagangai District. ... Respondents in WA(MD)No. 299 of 2013
Karaikudi Taluk, Sivaganga District.
... Respondents in WA(MD)Nos.700 & 701 of 2008
WA's Prayer in Common:
Writ Appeal Petitions filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order passed in WP(MD)No.1702 of 2006 dated 24.09.2006, WP(MD)No.10699 of 2015 dated 29.09.2008, WP(MD)No.10136 of 2018 dated 05.01.2009, WP(MD)No.1905 of 2006 dated 24.09.2008, WP(MD) Nos.10137 of 2008, 10139 of 2008 dated 05.01.2009, WP(MD)Nos.190 of 2006, 2904 of 2005, 2906 of 2005, 1693 of 2006 dated 24.09.2008, WP (MD).No.10728 of 2008 dated 07.01.2009, WP(MD)Nos.763 of 2006, 764 of 2006 dated 24.09.2008, WP(MD)No.10135 of 2008 dated 01.01.2009.
Prayer in WP(MD). 1702/ 2006 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents herein their men, agents, servants or any one caliming under them from in any manner ingterfering with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property measuring an extent of 1.87.0 hectares in sruvey Nos.237 Kazhanivasal, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District or from
3/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
dispossessing the pettiioner from the same in any manner and direct the respndent to carry out the corrections in the name of the petitioner in all the revenue records and village accounts
Prayer in WP(MD). 10699/ 2005 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to effect mutations in the revenue records and the village accounts in favour of the petitioner in respect of the lands comprised in S.F.Nos. 426/2 to 426/8, 428/3, 429/1 to 429/7 in K.Rayavaram (village No. 115) Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District.
Prayer in WP(MD). 10136/ 2008 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.10.2008 in N.K.A1/3343/2008 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents not to disturb the peaceful and possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in the property in T.S.No.171/3 Sub divided from 171/1 to an extent of 120 sq.meter in Karaikudi Taluk, Sivaganga District.
Prayer in WP(MD). 1905/ 2006 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and its offcials and servants from in any manner demolishing or removing structures of the petitioners building or in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in T.S.No. 498/88-A2, kalanivaasal, karaikudi, Sivaganga district without following due process of law.
Prayer in WP(MD). 10137/ 2008 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.10.2008 in N.K.A1/3343/2008 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents not to disturb the peaceful and possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in the property bearing T.S.No.62/2B in Block No.2, Ward No.13 of an extent of 0.0234.00 Sq.metre in Karaikudi Taluk and Town, Sivaganga District.
Prayer in WP(MD). 10139/ 2008 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the
4/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.10.2008 in N.K.A1/3343/2008 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents not to disturb the peaceful and possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in the property of an extent of 0.0844.50 sq.meter in S.No.944/2, Block 10,Ward No.1, Kalanivasal Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District.
Prayer in WP(MD). 190/ 2006 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents and its officials and servants from in any manner demolishing or removing structures of the petitioner or in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property namely S.No. 69, kalanivaasal, Karaikudi, Sivaganga district.
Prayer in WP(MD). 2904/ 2005 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to carry out mutation of entry in the revenue records in respect of land of an extent of 1.50 acres in S.No.48, Kalanivasal Village,Karaikkudi Taluk, Sivagangai District and incorporate the name of the petitioner herein as pattadar in respect of the said land.
Prayer in WP(MD). 2906/ 2005 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to carry out mutation of entry in the revenue records in respect of land of an extent of 3.50 acres in S.No.134/2 O-Thiruvayal Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District and incorporate the name of the petitioner herein as pattadar in respect of the said land.
Prayer in WP(MD). 1693/ 2006 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents herein their men, agents, servants or any one claiming under them from in any manner interfering with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property measuring an extent of 0.80.0 hectares in Survey Nos. 240/1 part New survey No. 240/1 kazhanivasal, karaikudi taluk, Sivagangai district or from dispossessing the pettiioners from the same in any manner and direct the respondents to carry out the corrections in the name of the petitioner in all the revenue records and village accounts.
Prayer in WP(MD). 10728/ 2008 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of
5/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent dated 30/10/2008 in N.K.NO. A1/3343/2008 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents 1, 2 not to disturb the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitionier in the property bearing old s.No. 552/8 present S.No. 561 in Block No. 16, of an extent of 1.1968.00 sq.metre in karaikudi town, sivaganga district.
Prayer in WP(MD). 763/ 2006 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS Forbearing the respondents herein, their men, agents, servants or any one claming under them from in any manner interfering with the petitioner s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property measuring an extent of 1.50 acres in Survey No.48 Kalanivasal Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District or from dispossessing the petitioner from the same in any manner.
Prayer in WP(MD). 764/ 2006 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS Forbearing the respondents herein, their men. agents, servants or any one claming under them from in any manner interfering with the petitioner s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property measuring an extent of 3.50 acres in Survey No. 134./2, O Siruvayal Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai or from dispossessing the petitioner from the same in any manner.
Prayer in WP(MD). 10135/ 2008 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.10.2008 in N.K.A1/3343/2008 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents not to disturb the peaceful and possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in the property of an extent of 0.0079.00 sq.meter in S.No.120/4 Block 2, Ward No.8, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivaganga District.
For Appellants : Mr.AR.L.Sundarasen Senior Counsel for Mr.J.Anandkumar in WA(MD)No.618,316, 317 of 2009, 332 of 2011.
6/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
Mr.AR.L.Sundarasen Senior Counsel for Mr.K.K.Senthil in WA(MD)No.703 of 2008 Mr.AR.L.Sundarasen Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram in WA(MD)No.324 & 325 of 2009
Mr.AR.L.Sundarasen Senior Counsel for Mr.D.Selvanayagam in WA(MD)No.323 of 2009 Mr.AR.L.Sundarasen Senior Counsel for Mr.AL.Gandhi Mathi in WA(MD)No.698, 700 & 701 of 2008
Mr.V.Raghavachari, in WA(MD)No.299 of 2013
Mr.AR.L.Sundarasen Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan in WA(MD)No.718 of 2008 For Respondents : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar, Special Government Pleader in all the WA's
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)
Since the issue involved in these writ appeals are one and the same, these writ appeals are taken up together and disposed of by means of this common judgment.
2.The unsuccessful writ petitioners are the appellants herein.
7/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
| S. No |
Name | Case No. | Dates of ASO Order |
Village |
S.No | Extent | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | R.Maniambalam | W.A(MD) No.618 /2009 |
12.02.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 237 | 1.87.0 Hec. |
Government Dry unoccupied |
| 2 | S.Chellakannu | W.A(MD) No.697/2008 |
08.01.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 48 | 1.50 acres |
Forest Poramboke |
| 3 | S.Chellakannu | W.A(MD) No.698/2008 |
08.01.1996 | O.Siruvayal | 134/ 2 |
3.50 acre | Kuttivayal Kanmoi (Water Course) |
| 4. | S.Chellakannu | W.A(MD) No.700/2008 |
08.01.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 48 | 1.50 acre | Forest Poramboke |
| 5. | S.Chellakannu | W.A(MD) No.701/2008 |
08.01.1996 | O.Siruvayal | 134/ 2 |
3.50 acre | Kuttivayal Kanmoi (Water Course) |
| 6 | Kaspar | W.A(MD) No.703/2008 |
24.02.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 69 | 0.32.0 hec. |
Sangasamuthrakanm oi (Water Course) |
| 7 | Jothi | W.A(MD) No.300/2009 |
15.06.1995 | Kazhanivasal | 1042 /4 |
0.02.71 hec. |
Channel Poramboke (Water Course) |
| 8 | Sheik Abdullah | W.A(MD) No.316/2009 |
18.01.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 552/ 8 pres ent S.No. 561 |
1.1968.0 sq. Mtr. |
Quarry Poramboke |
| 9. | Chellakannu Rawther |
W.A(MD) No.317/2009 |
16.10.1995 | Kazhanivasal | 120/ 4 |
0.0079.0 sq. mtr. |
Channel Poramboke (Water Course) |
| **10. ** | D.Srinivasan | W.A(MD) No.323/2009 |
28.08.1995 | Kazhanivasal | 171/ 3 |
0.0125.0 sq. mtr. |
Oorani Poramboke (Water Course) |
| 11 | Natarajan Chettiar | W.A(MD) No.324/2009 |
23.02.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 62/2 b |
0.0284.0 sq. mtr. |
Channel Poramboke (Water Course) |
| 12 | Arumuga Udayar | W.A(MD) No.325/2009 |
28.06.1995 | Kazhanivasal | 944/ 2 |
844.5 sq. mtr. |
Manakattu kanmoi (Water Course) |
| 13 | K.P.MohanaSundara m M.Kavitha |
W.A(MD) No.332/2009 |
30.06.1995 | Kazhanivasal | 498/ 88- A2 |
0.2541.0 sq. mtr. |
Road Poramboke |
| 14 | S.Sivaraj | W.A(MD) No.229/2013 |
06.02.1996 | Kazhanivasal | 240/ 1 |
0.80.0 hec. |
Govt. Dry unoccupied |
8/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
9/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
resulting in F.I.Rs being filed against them under Sections 468, 471 r/w 420 of I.P.C.
"2) As requested by you and in the light of the directions of the Hon'ble High Court, Madras in the reference second cited the order of the Assistant Settlement Officer, available file S.R.145/96(A) dated 15.02.1996 has been scrutinised. It is seen from the file of the Assistant Settlement Officer, that one Peria Karuppan by his petition dated Nil, applied to the Assistant Settlement Officer for grant of patta for an extent of 5.45 acres in old S.No.55 without enclosed any valid documentary evidence in support of his claim.
3) The following other defects were also noticed.
(i)The petition was not even numbered and there is no office seal of the Assistant Settlement Officer in the face of the petition.
(ii)No statutory notice was sent to the Tahsildar, petitioner or any other person by the Assistant Settlement Officer.
(iii)The Assistant Settlement Officer has filed the depositions of the Village Administrative Officer and the petitioner alone.
(iv)Although the Assistant Settlement Officer has stated in the alleged order that he has inspected the lands on 27.01.1996, no notes of inspection is available in the file.
(v)The Assistant Settlement Officer had not verified or called for any prior settlement records and S.F.1,7 & 10 and filed.
vi)the time limit for applying for patta under Section 9 or any other provisions of the Act.26/63 were over as early as 35 years back. The petition is time barred and also the A.S.O. has no jurisdiction or powers to grant patta even under his official authority. When the land had been treated as Government land, the Assistant
10/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
Settlement Officer had no power to reopen the matter which had been settled already.
vii)Further no record of evidence is available in the file to show that the applicant had filed title with continuous possession and enjoyment of the Government poramboke land.
3) Therefore, it is clear from the above facts that the petitioner conspired to grab the Government lands with the connivance of the Village Administrative Officer and the Assistant Settlement Officer and created an order illegally for unlawful gain.
4) In the circumstances explained above, the illegal order passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Madurai cannot be implemented in the village accounts. I request you to give a detailed reply to the petitioner on the above lines and send a copy to this office.
5)I also request you to report these fraudulent and illegal activities of the A.S.O's Madurai who have connived with the land grabbers and paved way to grab Government lands in Kazhanivasal and their misfeasance in granting Government lands in other villages also. The Government Pleaders may be properly explained about the illegal and bogus orders of the then A.S.O. Thiru.Muthukrishnan which could not be implemented. If the Government Pleaders of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court are properly appraised about this land scam we may avoid these kind of directions from the High Court and unnecessary embarrassment to the State.'
11/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
service.
(i) The application made to the Assistant Settlement Officer, Madurai, by all these appellants itself were time barred one and ought not to have been entertained much less to issue patta under the Act 26 of 1963.
(ii) There is no possession or enjoyment of the said property by the appellants. Their statement that they are in possession are false less there is no registration of their names in any of the village accounts prior to the settlement proceedings.
(iii) The Assistant Settlement Officer has no power or right to reclassify the assets 'dry waste land' into ryotwari land. The said act itself would go to show that the order passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer was based on bogus records.
(iv) It is to be noted that the said lands were also entered into Prohibitory Order Book for use of industrial purpose. Hence, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Madurai, had no power to issue patta for the Government poramboke land, which is already entered in Prohibitory Order Book.
(v) It is specifically mentioned by the respondents that the impugned proceedings of the Assistant Settlement Officer, Maduri, was communicated to the officials and it is for them to prefer any appeal. The respondents became aware of the fact only when the appellants applied for mutation of revenue records. In the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ proceedings of the Commissioner of Land Administration, it is held
12/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
that the appellants had obtained patta fraudulantly as the Assistant Settlement Officer did not have the power or jurisdiction to issue patta and that, disciplinary action had already been initiated against the delinquent officer.
// True Copy //
Note :
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.
To:
13/14
W.A(MD)Nos.618 of 2009, 718 of 2008, 323 of 2009, 332 of 2011, 324 of 2009, 325 of 2009, 703 of 2008, 697 of 2008, 698 of 2008, 299 of 2013, 316 of 2009, 700 of 2008, 701 of 2008, 317 of 2009
5. The Tahsildar,
Thirumayam, Pudukkottai District.
Devakkottai, Sivaganga District.
+3ccs to Mr.J.ANAND KUMAR, Advocate in SR.Nos.13200,13201,13203 +1cc to Mr.D.SELVANAYAGAM, Advocate in SR.No.13206 +1cc to Mr.V.MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM, Advocate in SR.No.13205 +1cc to Mr.K.K.SENTHIL, Advocate in SR.No.13204 +1cc to Mr.S.SRINIVASA RAGHAVAN, Advocate in SR.No.13687 +1cc to Mr.AR.L.GANTHI MATHI, Advocate in SR.No.13170 +1cc to Mr.V.RAHAVACHARI, Advocate in SR.No.13454
+1cc to THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN SR.No.13865
JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A(MD)No.618 of 2009(batch) 24.03.2021
pm AE/24.05.2021/14P/18C
14/14
2 issues framed by the court
Could the Assistant Settlement Officer grant ryotwari pattas after settlement proceedings had attained finality?
Could fraudulently procured pattas support claims for revenue mutation or protection of possession?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R.Mani Ambalam
The District Revenue Officer Sivagangai.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.
The Tahsildar Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
S.KANNAMMAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
