Allowed

Annai J.K.K.Sampoorani Ammal v. the District Collector

Madras HC4 Oct 2021WP/17141/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a writ petition challenging an attachment order for encroachment tax. The court held that the revenue authority violated natural justice by passing orders without notice or hearing. The matter was remanded for a fresh inquiry and fresh orders within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; matter remitted for fresh enquiry with notice and hearing; fresh order to be passed within 12 weeks.

Annai J.K.K.Sampoorani Ammal Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

W.P.NO.17141 OF 2013 AND M.P.NO.1 OF 2013

¶6

Annai J.K.K.Sampooranai Ammal Charitable Trust, by its Managing Trustee, J.K.K.Munirajah, Salem Main Road, Ethirmedu, Valayaranur Post, Komarapalayam, Namakkal District. ... Petitioner

¶7

.Vs.

¶8

The District Collector, Office of District Collector, Namakkal.

¶9

The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Trichengode, Namakkal District.

¶10

The Revenue Officer, Komarapalayam Amani Village, Trichengode Taluk, Namakkal District. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER:-

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent made in Na.Ka.No.21075/2007/A5, dated 05.03.2013 and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Raja Sekaran For Respondents : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan Government Advocate

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This writ petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent made in Na.Ka.No.21075/2007/A5, dated 05.03.2013 and quash the same.

¶17

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a charitable institution started with an avowed object to help physically challenged children to improve their livelihood. The petitioner/institution is located in S.F.No.143/3 ad-measuring 2.72 acres and in S.F.No.89/1B ad-measuring 8.42 acres situated at Komarapalayam Amani Village, Tiruchengode Taluk, Namakkal District. The lands comprised in S.F.No.89/2 and S.F.No.146/2 ad-measuring 0.09.05 hectares and 0.84.5 hectares, respectively, are the Government Poramboke lands. However, it cannot be used as a regular pathway, as the land is full of hard rocks and is uninhabitable. It is bounded on the North by patta lands belonging to the third party in Salem District and East by the patta lands, also belonging to third party in Namakkal District and on the West and South by the petitioner's patta lands. However, on inspection, it was found and concluded that the petitioner/institution has encroached this property and it was directed to pay the encroachment tax at Rs.33,82,828/- from the month of April 1997 to March 2005. Further, the second respondent by report dated 08.10.2011 stated as follows:-

¶18

“jpUr;br';nfhL tl;lk ;. Fkhughisak; mkhdp fpuhkk; ru;nt vz;/89?2 tp!;/0/09/5 ncwf;nlu ; g[" ;ir jupR muR g[wk ;nghf;F epyk; n$/nf/nf/bkl;upFnyrd; gs;spapd; tlfpHf;F K:iyapy; mike;Js ;sJ/ jzpf;iff ;F rk;ge ;jkhd g[yj ;jpd; tlfpHf;F gFjpapy; nryk; khtl;lk ;. r';ffpup tl;lk ;. fj;njup fpuhkj;jpw;F cl;gl ;l gFjpahFk;/ nkw;F gFjp kw;Wk ; bjw;F gFjpapy; mike;Js ;s g[yd;fs ; n$/nf/nf/ rk;g{u ;zpak;khs; ou!;l ; bgaupy; gl;lhthf ,Ue;J tUfpwJ/ ,e;epyk; ,e;j ou!;od ; tlfpHf;F gFjpapy; mike;Js ;sJ/ tlf;F vy;iyahf ,g;gFjp mike;Js ;sjhYk;/ bjhlu;e ;J ntW khtl;l g[y vz;fs ; tUfpd;w fhuzj;jhYk; vy;iyf; nfhlhf ,Uf;fpd;w ,e;j g[wk ;nghf;F g[yj ;jpw;F bry;y jltrjp VJk; ,y;iy/ ,g;g [yj ;jpd; K:d ;W vy;iyapy; mike;Js ;s epy';fs ; ou!;l ; bgaupy; gl;lhthft[k ; tlf;F vy;iy ntW khtl;l vy;iyahft[k ; mike;Js ;sJ/ cly; CdKw;nwhu; gs;spf;F tUk; FHe;ijfspd; ghJfhg;g [ fUjpa[k ;. btspapypUe;J bghJkf;fs ; EiHtij jLf;ft [k ; ghJfhg;gpd; bghUl;L fhk;gt [z ;L Rtu; vGg;gg ;gl ;Ls ;sJ/ fhk;gt [z ;l ; xl;oa cl;g [wj ;jpy; gpu!;jhg g[yk ; Kl;fs ;. brofs; Kisj;J juprhf cs;sJ/ fhk;gt [z ;Lf ;Fk ; cly; CdKw;nwhu; gs;sp fl;olj;jpw;Fk ; ,ilapy; epWtdj;jpd; gl;lh epyk; fhypahfnt cs;sJ/ jzpf;if kw;Wk ; tprhuiz rkaj;jpy; jh';fs ; muR g[y vz;zpd; mj;ij mwpe;J Mf;fpukpg;g [ bra;a [k ; nehf;fpy; fhk;gt [z ;L vGg;gtpy;iy/

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

“gp”ajh!;J gjpt[ bra;ag ;gl ;Ls ;sJ/ mjd; mog;gilapy; kl;Lk ;

¶21

epWtdj;jhy ; fhk;gt [z ;L nghlg;gl ;Ls ;sij jtpu gpu!;jhg g[yk ; ntW tifapy; gad;gLj;jg ;gltpy;iy/ ehsJ njjpapy; juprhfnt cs;sJ/ fhk;gt [z ;L itf;fg ;gl ;Ls ;sjhy; ml';fy ; jzpf;iff;Fwpg;gpy; “gp”ajh!;J gjpt[ bra;ag ;gl ;Ls ;sJ/ mjd; mog;gilapy; kl;Lk ; Fj;jif epu;zak; bra;jpUg;gJ Vw;g [ilajhf ,y;iy/ ve;jtpjkhd tzpf nehf;fpYk; bray;gltpy;iy/ ,jdhy; ,e;epWtdj;Jf ;F ve;jtpjkhd tUkhdKk; ,y;iy/ ,e;j fy;tp epWtdk; muR cjtpa[ld ; bray;gl ;L tUfpwJ vd;gJk; Fwpg;gplj;jf ;fJ/ ,e;j R{H;epiyapy; ntW ve;j epue;ju fl;olk; nghd;W vJt[k ; ,y;iy Fj;jif bjhif tR{y; bra;a ,ayhj epiy cs;sJ/ Vbddpy; nkw;go fy;tp epWtdj;jhuhy; ,e;j jupR epyj;jpy ; Mf;fpukpg;g [ ,y;iy/ fl;ol' ;fs ; vJt[k ; fl;o tpahgu nehf;fj ;jpw;F gad;gLj;jtpy;iy/ nghl;nlh efy; ,izf;fg ;gl ;lLs;sJ/ ,e;j gj;jpia jzpf;if Fwpg;gpy ; ,Ue;J ePf;fk ; bra;a brd;id kz;ly fzf;fhaUf;F Kd;bkhHpt[ mDg;gyhk; vd;gijg ; gzpt[ld; bjuptpj;Jf ; bfhs;fpnwd;/”

¶22

The said report was duly sent to the first respondent. However, without referring the said report, the second respondent has again passed order dated 22.02.2013, directing the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar No-1, Komarapalayam and the Revenue Inspector, Komarapalayam to collect the said sum from the petitioner for the reason that, for the past 10 years, they had encroached the said portion and constructed building and running educational institutions in the name and style of “J.K.K.Munirajah Educational Trust”.

¶23

On receipt of the said order dated 22.02.2013, the petitioner sent a detailed representation to the first respondent to re-consider the same, since as per the Tahsildar's report, the subject land is not in use by the petitioner. Though it is located inside the compound, it cannot be used at any point of time and there is no construction made in the said land. It is lying vacant with bushes. When the said representation is pending on the file of the first respondent, the third respondent passed the impugned order of attachment of the petitioner's property for non-payment of the encroachment tax to the tune of Rs.33,82,828/-.

¶24

On a perusal of the said order dated 22.02.2013 passed by the second respondent, it is clear that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing and without conducting any enquiry, the second respondent passed the said order on the basis of the report of the Accountant General of State and the report of the second respondent's office. However, while passing the said order, the order passed by the then officer dated 08.10.2011 was not considered and the second respondent, particularly suggested to remove the observation in the report of the Accountant General of State. Therefore, it is in

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner has not been heard and he was not given an opportunity of hearing. On this ground alone, the order dated 22.02.2013 and consequential impugned order dated 05.03.2013 of attachment, are vitiated and they are liable to be set aside.

¶27

In view of the above discussion, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the second respondent for passing fresh order. The second respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner and the parties concerned and conduct enquiry after giving full opportunity of hearing to them and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that, while passing the order, the second respondent is directed to consider the earlier report submitted by the second respondent dated 08.10.2011.

¶28

In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶31

//True Copy//

¶32

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶33

¶34

¶35

The District Collector, Office of District Collector, Namakkal.

¶36

The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Trichengode, Namakkal District.

¶37

The Revenue Officer,

¶38

Komarapalayam Amani Village,

¶39

Trichengode Taluk, Namakkal District.

¶40

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.52006

¶41

W.P.NO.17141 OF 2013

¶42

GP(CO) PBS/11/11/2021

¶43

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Annai J.K.K.Sampoorani Ammal v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Annai J.K.K.Sampoorani Ammal v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.M.Chacko Vs the Assistant Director

Amudha Vs State of Tamil Nadu

Harikrishnan Vs The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu

P.Pazhamalai, Vs The State of Tamilnadu

P.Mohanraj, S/O.Perianna Vs the District Registrar

P. Sundarhan Vs the District Collector