Disposed

B.Gokulanathan v. the Settlement Officer

Madras HC21 Sept 2022WP/5225/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of three writ petitions concerning disputed land titles and patta allotments. The Court, noting the parties consent, directed the Commissioner of Land Administration to adjudicate the dispute with a hearing within six months and maintained the status quo during the interim.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Commissioner of Land Administration to decide the issue between the parties within six months; maintenance of status quo.

B.Gokulanathan Vs the Settlement Officer — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 21.09.2022

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.2 of 2013 & 2 of 2014 and W.M.P.Nos.21167 & 21165 of 2022

¶7

W.P.No.5225 of 2011:

¶8

B.Gokulanathan ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Settlement Officer, Survey House, 3^rd Floor, Chepauk, Chennai – 5.

¶11

2.The Assistant Settlement Officer, (North) Chepauk, Chennai – 5. 3.Muthukrishnan

¶12

4.D.Manickarajan

¶13

5.Selvanayaki

¶14

6.Vijyalakshmi

¶15

7.Sakunthala 8.D.Prabhakar … Respondents

¶16

Page No.1 of 11

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶19

PRAYER:

¶20

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in Revision No.1&5/2010/E1 dated 31.01.2011 confirming the orders of the second respondent in SR.01/2009(E2/3622/008 dated 16.11.2009 and quash the same and direct the second respondent to grant joint patta in favour of the petitioner and respondents 3 to 7 in terms of the Partition Suit final decree in O.S.No.669/1962 dated 29.11.1966, on the file of the District Munsif, Poonamallee in respect of the land in S.No.179/1, T.S.No.7, Block No.25, Old Paimash No.170 and 173 of No.136, Adambakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District measuring an extent of 4384 Sq.Meters.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kamadevan

¶22

For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.U.Bharanidharan, Additional Government Pleader

¶23

For Respondents 3,5 & 7 : Mr.V.R.Karthikeyan For Respondents 4,6 & 8 : Mr.K.Senthilkumar

¶24

W.P.No.28274 of 2013:

¶25

A.Kasthuri ... Petitioner

¶26

Vs.

¶27

1.The District Collector,

¶28

Page No.2 of 11

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶31

Collectorate, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District.

¶32

2.The Commissioner and Director of Survey and Settlement, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶33

3.The Settlement Officer, Survey and Settlement Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶34

4.The Assistant Settlement Officer (North), Survey and Settlement Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶35

5.Revenue Divisional Officer, Tambaram, Kanchipuram District.

¶36

6.Special Tahsildar, Survey and Settlement Department, Alandur, Kanchipuram District, Chennai – 600 016.

¶37

7.The Tahsildar, Revenue Department,

¶38

Alandur, Kanchipuram District, Chennai – 600 016.

¶39

8.Town Surveyor, Alandur Municipality,

¶40

Alandur, Kancheepuram District, Chennai – 600 016.

¶41

Page No.3 of 11

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶44

9.N.Murugan

¶45

10.D.Prabhakar

¶46

Rep. by his General Power Agent S.Thanigaivel

¶47

(R10 impleaded vide order dated 22.06.2022 made in W.M.P.No.14095/2022) … Respondents

¶48

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the fifth respondent in Na.Ka.No.1401/2013/A dated 19.07.2013 and the Town Survey Field Register dated 06.08.2013 issued by the sixth and eighth respondent and Town Survey Field Survey Extract dated Nil issued by the eight respondent in pursuance of impugned order, for Survey No.179/1PT, Survey Field No.7/1, 7/2, Ward No.G, Block No.25 admeasuring to an extent of 1.22 Acres, Adampakkam Village, Alandur Taluk, Kanchipuram District, in favour of ninth respondent herein and quash the same.

¶49

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Viduthalai, Senior Advocate

¶50

for Mr.A.R.Balaji

¶51

For Respondents 1 to 8 : Mr.U.Bharanidharan, Additional Government Pleader

¶52

For Respondent 9 : Mr.M.Raja For Respondent 10 : Mr.K.Senthilkumar

¶53

W.P.No.9907 of 2014

¶54

B.Gokulanathan ... Petitioner

¶55

Vs.

¶56

Page No.4 of 11

¶57

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶58

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶59

1.The Settlement Officer, Survey House, 3^rd Floor, Chepauk, Chennai – 5.

¶60

2.The Assistant Settlement Officer, (North) Chepauk, Chennai – 5. 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tambaram, Kancheepuram District.

¶61

4.The Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶62

5.The Special Thasildar, Survey & Settlement, Alandur, Chennai – 600 016.

¶63

6.Kasthuri

7.A.Senthilkumar

8.A.Udayakumar

9.A.Lakshmikanthan

10.A.Balaji

11.N.Murugan

12.D.Prabhakar … Respondents

¶70

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for records of the fifth respondent in Town/Va.P.THo.No.491/2013 dated 10.06.2013 granting patta

¶71

Page No.5 of 11

¶72

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶73

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶74

to an extent of 45 cents in favour of the respondents 6 to 10 and the proceedings of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.1401/2013/A dated 19.07.2013 granting patta to an extent of 1.22 Acres in favour of the 11^th respondent in respect of the land in Survey.No.179/1, T.S.No.7, Block No.25, Old Paimash No.170 and 173 of No.136, Adambakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶75

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kamadevan

¶76

For Respondents 1 to 5 : Mr.U.Bharanidharan, Additional Government Pleader

¶77

For Respondents 6 to 10 : Mr.R.Viduthalai, Senior Counsel for Mr.A.R.Balaji

¶78

For Respondent 11 : Mr.M.Raja For Respondent 12 : Mr.K.Senthilkumar

¶79

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶80

Since the relief sought in these writ petitions are one and the same, they are heard together and disposed of by way of a common order.

¶81

The grievance of the petitioners is that their lands were taken over

¶82

by the Government under the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)Act 30 of 1963. In regard to this proceedings, the

¶83

Page No.6 of 11

¶84

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶85

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶86

Revenue Authorities have issued different orders. This being the case, there was a dispute arisen between the parties concerned in regard to the property and one party is claiming that they obtained a Ryotwari patta before the Settlement Officer and the other party claimed that they owned a title and some of the parties have filed a Civil Suit before the Competent Civil Court for declaration and injunction suit and the petitioner in W.P.No.28274 of 2013 and the respondents in W.P.No.9907 of 2014 have filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Land Acquisition in respect of very same property. Challenging the aforesaid order issued by the Revenue Officials, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions.

¶87

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.28274 of 2013 submitted that though very many grounds have been raised in these writ petitions, this Court, without going into the merits of the case may issue a direction to the Commissioner of Land Administration to decide the issue in between the parties.

¶88

The aforesaid submission made by the learned senior counsel for the

¶89

Page No.7 of 11

¶90

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶91

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶92

petitioner in W.P.No.28274 of 2013 has been agreed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the respondents in other writ petitions.

¶93

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶94

In view of the consent expressed by the learned senior counsel as well as the counsels appearing for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to give direction to the Commissioner of Land Administration to decide the issue between the parties without influencing any of the observation made by the Revenue Officials by providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, till then, the parties are directed to maintain the status quo.

¶95

7 . However, liberty is granted to the persons, who are not a party in these proceedings which is pending before the Commissioner of Land

¶96

Page No.8 of 11

¶97

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶98

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶99

Administration for filing appropriate impleading petition. On such filing, the Commissioner of Land Administration is directed to implead them and

¶100

provide an opportunity of hearing and pass appropriate orders.

¶101

With the aforesaid direction, these writ petitions are disposed of. No

¶102

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶103

21.09.2022

¶104

vm Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No

¶105

To:

¶106

1.The Settlement Officer, Survey House, 3^rd Floor, Chepauk, Chennai – 5.

¶107

2.The Assistant Settlement Officer, (North) Chepauk, Chennai – 5.

¶108

3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram District.

¶109

Page No.9 of 11

¶110

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶111

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶112

4.The Commissioner and Director of Survey and Settlement,

¶113

Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶114

5.The Settlement Officer, Survey and Settlement Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶115

6.The Assistant Settlement Officer (North), Survey and Settlement Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶116

7.Revenue Divisional Officer, Tambaram, Kanchipuram District.

¶117

8.Special Tahsildar, Survey and Settlement Department, Alandur, Kanchipuram District, Chennai – 600 016.

¶118

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

¶119

¶120

9.The Tahsildar, Revenue Department, Alandur, Kanchipuram District, Chennai – 600 016.

¶121

10.Town Surveyor, Alandur Municipality, Alandur, Kancheepuram District,

¶122

Page No.10 of 11

¶123

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶124

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶125

Chennai – 600 016.

¶126

11.The Tahsildar, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶127

W.P.Nos.5225 of 2011, 28274 of 2013 & 9907 of 2014

¶128

21.09.2022

¶129

Page No.11 of 11

¶130

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

B.Gokulanathan v. the Settlement Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Gokulanathan v. the Settlement Officer

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

Mr. C.Seethapathi, Vs the District Collector

P.Govindarajan, Vs The Director of Settlement

Mr. N.Athimoolam, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

V.Kamalakannan Vs The Additional Chief Secretary

S.Sasirekha Vs the Sub Registrar

R.Mohan Vs The Tahsildar