The High Court dismissed petitions seeking to quash orders cancelling a patta. Ruling that disputed title and ownership must be resolved in Civil Court, especially where a decree exists or special appeal remedies remain available to the petitioner.
The writ petitions were dismissed, connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, and no cost was awarded.
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.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013 and
M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013
W.P.No.21648 of 2012:
V.S.Chandrasekar ... Petitioner
Vs
... Respondents
1/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order of the second respondent bearing Na.Ka.d2/6263/2012 dated 09.05.2012 and quash the same and consequently directing the second respondent herein to grant No Objection Certificate to the petitioner for construction of a Commercial Complex based on his patta.
For Petitioner : M/s.V.Srimathi For Respondents : For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Arunkumar Additional Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate (HR&CE)
W.P.No.23049 of 2013:
V.S.Chandrasekar ... Petitioner
Vs
Chennai.
2/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.A2/1079/2013 dated 15.07.2013 and quash the same and direct the respondents to maintain the individual patta granted in favour of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramesh
For Respondents : For R1 to R3 & R6: Mr.T.Arunkumar Additional Government Pleader For R4 & R5 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate (HR&CE)
3/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
COMMON ORDER
By this common order both the writ petitions are being dismissed.
permanent injunction.
4/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
and the fourth respondent temple filed an application under the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983, to cancel the patta granted in favour of the writ petitioner. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vellore, conducted an enquiry by affording an opportunity to all the parties and cancelled the patta granted in favour of the writ petitioner, mainly on the ground that the petitioner has not established his title over the patta.
India, cannot be extended for the purpose of adjudication.
5/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
otherwise, are to be done with reference to the documents and evidence in original before the Civil Court of Law.
6/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
Revenue Authorities cannot decide the issues regarding cancellation of patta or otherwise.
as under:-
“14. Bar of suits.- No suit shall lie against the Government or any officer of the Government in respect of a claim to have an entry made in any patta pass book that is maintained under this Act or to have any such entry omitted or amended:
Provided that if any person is aggrieved as to any right of which he is in possession, by an entry made in the patta pass book under this Act, he may institute a suit for a declaration of his rights under Chapter VI of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (Central Act 47 of 1963); and the entry in the patta pass book shall be amended in accordance with any such declaration.”
7/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
19.06.2023
Index : Yes/ No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking Order rgm
8/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
To
Chepauk, Chennai.
9/10
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
rgm
W.P.Nos.21648 of 2012 & 23049 of 2013
and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013
19.06.2023
10/10
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can adjudicate disputed titles and ownership of land in writ proceedings.
Whether the Revenue Authorities can act independently when a Civil Court decree exists regarding the same land.
Whether a petitioner can bypass appellate remedies under the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983 to file a writ petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
V.S.Chandrasekar
The Collector, Vellore District
The District Revenue Officer, Vellore District
The Tasildhar, Vellore Taluk
The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Tharakeswarar Thirukoil
The State of Tamil Nadu
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
