This writ petition challenging the Tahsildar's order rejecting assignment patta for remaining land is dismissed. The court found no error in the order as the land was utilized as a public pathway.
Writ Petition dismissed; no costs; connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition closed.
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: 29.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
W.P.No.29777 of 2019 and W.M.P. No. 29674 of 2019
K.Duraisamy, S/o. Kaliyaperumal Padayatchi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector, Villupuram District, Villupuram.
2.The Sub-Collector, Kallakurichi.
3.The Tahsildar, Chinnasalem. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to 3rd respondent's proceedings made in Na.Ka.E1/4318/2019 dated 31.01.2020 to quash the same and direct the respondents to grant assignment patta in favour of the petitioner, with respect to land comprised in S.No.250/14, over an extent of 0.07.5 ares in Thagam Theerthapuram Village, Chinna Salem Taluk, Kallakurichi District.
(Prayer amended as per order dated 29.06.2021 in W.M.P.No.12256 of 2020)
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan
For Respondents : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, Government Advocate for R1 to R3
O R D E R
(The case has been heard through video conference)
Earlier, the Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's
representation dated 16.08.2019 and grant patta in his favour for Survey No.250/14 admeasuring an extent of 21 cents situated at Thagam Theerthapuram Village, Chinnasalem Taluk, Villupuram District.
counsel appearing for petitioner as well as learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents and perused the records carefully.
respect of 65 cents, however, the 3rd respondent Tahsildar, after considering his request, has granted assignment in respect of 45 cents. So far as remaining extent of 20 cents is concerned, the 3rd respondent Tahsildar has clearly stated that it has been used as pathway by public and patta cannot be granted in respect of pathway. In the said circumstances, I find no error in the order passed by the 3rd respondent. As already the petitioner is having the benefit of enjoying 45 cents of Government land, he cannot seek for assignment in respect of a pathway. Therefore, I find no merit in this Writ Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VI) //True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rpp
To
W.P.No.29777 of 2019
GPL(CO) RVM(04/08/2021)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to assignment patta for the remaining extent of land claimed to be used as a public pathway.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's claim for the remaining land is erroneous in law or fact.
K.Duraisamy
The District Collector, Villupuram District
The Sub-Collector, Kallakurichi
The Tahsildar, Chinnasalem
V.BHARATHIDASAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
