The court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order rejecting the grant of patta for land declared surplus. The court directed authorities to resume the surplus land within two weeks, confirming that the land vest with the government.
Respondents 1 to 3 directed to resume the surplus lands within two weeks. Writ petition dismissed.
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.No.29221 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.29221 of 2018 and
W.M.P.No.34159 of 2018
... Petitioners
Vs.
Page 1 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
3.Tahsildar, Coimbatore North Taluk, Coimbatore District – 641 018.
4.G.R.Karthikeyan
5.Mrs.PremaGovindasamy
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the 2 nd respondent, Revenue Divisional Officer, in respect of Na.Ka.No.7522/2012/A2 dated 21.07.2017 passed by the 2 nd respondent, Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore North, Coimbatore.
F or Petitioners : Mr.S.T.Bharath Gowtham For Respondents : For R1 and R3 : Mr.R.Ramanlaal, Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.T.ArunKumar, Additional Government Pleader. For R4 and R5 : No appearance.
O R D E R
The order of rejection to grant Patta by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore, in proceedings Na.Ka.No.7522/2012/A2 dated 21.07.2017 is under challenge in the present writ petition.
Page 2 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
2. The petitioners state that the land in S.F.Nos.444, 446, 447/1, 407/1, 407/2, 408, 410, 369, 370 and 375 in Vilankurichi Village, Coimbatore North Taluk, Coimbatore, measuring to an extent of 45 Acres and 82 Cents originally belonged to the grand father of the 1 st petitioner Late G.Govindasamy Naidu. The 5 th respondent Mrs.PremaGovindasamy is the grandmother of the writ petitioners. The 4 th respondent is also a relative of the writ petitioners. It is not in dispute between the parties that the subject land has already been declared as surplus land under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling) Act, 1961. However, the Authorities are in the
process of resuming the surplus lands declared under the provisions of the Act.
3. The proceedings initiated was originally challenged by the family members of the writ petitioners in W.P.No.44989 of 2002. The relief sought for in that writ petition is to call for the records comprised in proceedings No. D1/R.P.9/99(L.Ref.) on the file of the Land Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai, dated 10.03.2000, and acquire the same and forbear the respondents therein from initiating any proceedings in terms of the provisions of the
Page 3 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling) Act, 1961. This Court elaborately adjudicated the issues with reference to the provisions of the said Act and dismissed the writ petition.
4. In the concluding paragraph, this Court held that it is open to the respondents 1 and 2 therein to act in accordance with law pursuant to the impugned order to give effect to the same in the manner known to law. Thus, the declaration made, under the provisions of the Act in respect of the property that belonged to the family members of the petitioners, was confirmed by this Court. Further, directions was issued to the Land Commissioner to act in accordance with law based on the impugned order and give effect to the said order.
5. W.A.No.501 of 2011 was filed and the Hon'ble Division Bench of
this Court passed an order on 30.03.2011, dismissing the writ appeal by confirming the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.44989 of 2002.
Page 4 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
6. Even thereafter, the petitioners and their family members have not
allowed the Authorities to implement the order and again the 5 th respondent, who is none other than the grandmother of the writ petitioners, filed another writ petition in W.P.No.20014 of 2011 for a direction to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioners to grant Patta in the name of the 5 th respondent. This Court directed the Authorities to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders.
7. Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court to consider the representation submitted by the 5 th respondent, grandmother of the writ petitioners, the Tahsildhar, Coimbatore North, passed an order in proceedings dated 14.05.2012, granting Patta in the name of the family members of the petitioners. Since the Tahsildar had acted in contravention to the provisions of the Act, an appeal was preferred. The appeal filed before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore North, was adjudicated and the impugned order dated 21.07.2017 has been passed. The facts established would reveal that the petitioners and their family members made an attempt to unsettle the settled issues with reference to the declaration made by the Competent Authorities under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation
Page 5 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
of Ceiling) Act, 1961. Once the subject land was declared as surplus under
the provisions of the Act, the said land absolutely vest with the Government
and is to be distributed to the landless poor people by following the provisions of the Act and schemes framed under the rules.
which were declared as surplus, the family members of the petitioners have further initiated proceedings in order to block the actions of the respondents, despite the fact that this Court passed an order directing the Land Commissioner to implement the orders passed under the Act which was confirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court.
9. The order impugned is a speaking order wherein the entire facts
and circumstances are narrated regarding the declaration made under the Provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling) Act, 1961. The findings in the order reveals that the Tahsildhar has erroneously passed an order granting Patta in the name of the family members of the petitioners and therefore, the said order was set aside by the Revenue Divisional Officer in the appeal. The Tahsildar has not considered any of the facts and
Page 6 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
documents including the earlier order passed by the Competent Authorities,
declaring the subject land as surplus. Thus, the Tahsildhar had exercised his powers beyond his jurisdiction and without any authority.
10. The order impugned further states that the land vested with the Government pursuant to the declaration made under Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling) Act, 1961 and actions were already initiated for resumption of land and the files are pending before the competent Authorities. This being the factum established, the petitioners or their family members cannot be permitted to unsettle the settled issues and to reopen the file since the writ petition filed challenging the declaration under the Act was dismissed and the said order was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court. Thus, the writ petitioners are not entitled for the relief as such sought for in the present writ petition.
11. Consequently, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to resume the lands already declared as surplus under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling) Act, 1961, by following the procedures within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Page 7 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
12. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed . No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
13. Post the matter under the caption 'for reporting compliance' o n
22.09.2023.
07.09.2023
Index:Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes veda/sha
To
Page 8 of 9
W.P.No.29221 of 2018
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
sha
W.P.No.29221 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.34159 of 2018
07.09.2023
Page 9 of 9
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Land Commissioner can resume land already declared as surplus under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling) Act, 1961.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G.C.Sivaraj
Mr.U.Balaji
Mr.K.R.Jayaram
Green Valley Shelters Pvt.Ltd.
District Revenue Officer (DRO)
Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO)
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
