Disposed

K.Thangamoni v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC16 Jun 2022WP(MD)/2491/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the rejection of an Ex-Service man's request for land assignment due to lack of eligible land in a specific taluk. The Court directed the District Collector to reconsider the request across the district under Revenue Standing Order 15(24) and decide within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

The District Collector, Kanyakumari, is directed to consider the petitioner's request for land assignment in any taluk under Revenue Standing Order 15(24) and pass orders within twelve weeks.

K.Thangamoni Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.2491 of 2012

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.06.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.2491 of 2012

¶7

K.Thangamoni ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. 3.The Tahsildar, Thovalai Taluk, Bhoothapandy, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Tahsildar, Agasteeswaram Taluk, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. 5.The Tahsildar, Kalkulam Taluk, Thuckalay, Kanyakumari District. 6.The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the order of the second respondent vide Pro.No.M2/31162/2010 dated 05.01.2011, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to assign agricultural land to the petitioner in Kanyakumari District.

¶11

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

¶12

1/3

¶13

W.P(MD)No.2491 of 2012

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.C.T.Perumal

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.N.Muthu Vijayan Special Government Pleader

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The present writ petition has been filed challenging an order passed by the second respondent herein on 05.01.2011, under which the request for assignment of land has been rejected.

¶18

In the impugned order, the District Collector, Kanyakumari District has pointed out that there are no eligible lands available for assignment of land for agricultural purposes in Thovalai Taluk.

¶19

Now the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that he is not restricting his prayer with regard to the Thovalai Taluk alone and the District Collector may be directed to consider the petitioner's request for grant of assignment in any Taluk in the District depending upon the availability of the eligible lands.

¶20

Considering the fact that the petitioner is an Ex-Service man. He is entitled to certain preferential quota under Revenue Standing Order 15(24). In the impugned order, the District Collector has considered the request of the petitioner by analysing the lands available in Thovalai Taluk and arrived at a conclusion that there is no eligible land available in the said Taluk. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the District Collector. But the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is ready to accept assignment of land in any one of the Taluk in Kanyakumari District.

¶21

The District Collector, Kanyakumari is directed to consider the said request for assignment of land in the light of Revenue Standing Order 15(24), if any such application is being filed. In case if such an application is filed, the District Collector is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the application.

¶22

With the above said observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/06/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

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

¶26

2/3

¶27

W.P(MD)No.2491 of 2012

¶28

gbg

¶29

¶30

1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. 3.The Tahsildar, Thovalai Taluk, Bhoothapandy, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Tahsildar, Agasteeswaram Taluk, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. 5.The Tahsildar, Kalkulam Taluk, Thuckalay, Kanyakumari District. 6.The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District.

¶31

+1 CC to M/s.C.T. PERUMAL, Advocate ( SR-26256[F] dated 16/06/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-26541[F] dated 17/06/2022 )

¶32

W.P(MD)No.2491 of 2012 16.06.2022

¶33

RD(24.06.2022) 3P 9C

¶34

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

¶35

3/3

K.Thangamoni v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Thangamoni v. the State of Tamil Nadu

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

S. Karuppiah, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Perumal Vs the Land Commissioner

R.J.K. Thilak, Vs the Secretary to Government

Muthulakshmi, Vs the District Collector

A.T. Pasupathy, Vs the Inspector General of

A. Ragunathan(Died), Vs the District Revenue Officer