Partly allowed

Mukayee v. the District Collector

Madras HC20 Nov 2023WP(MD)/13476/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order holding that the petitioner is in continuous possession and enjoyment of 288/1 and 288/4 at Manjapettai Village for nearly four decades. Directs second respondent to act on third respondent report and restore patta in petitioner name within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to second respondent to act upon third respondent report and restore patta in petitioner name within three months.

Mukayee Vs the District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 20.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

Mukayee

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Pudukkottai District.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkottai District.

¶12

3.The Tahsildar, Gandharvakottai Taluk Office, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to restore back the petitioner name in respect of the assigned patta granted in the petitioner favour in respect of the lands comprised in S.No. 288/1 of an extent of 0.40.5 ares and in S.No.288/4 of an extent of 0.40.5 ares situated at Manjapettai village, Gandharvakottai Taluk, Pudukkottai District on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 12.04.2021 within the time stipulated time.

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶17

For Petitioner :Mr.B.Jameel Arasu For Respondents :Ms.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader *****

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of Writ of Mandamus

¶20

directing the respondents to restore the name of the petitioner in the assignment patta granted in favour of the petitioner with respect to the

¶21

subject property in S.Nos.288/1 and 288/4 at Manjapettai village, Gandharvakottai Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶22

2.When the matter came up for hearing on 06.11.2023, this Court

¶23

passed the following order:

¶24

“This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to restore the name of the petitioner with respect to the assignment patta, that was granted in her favour regarding the property in S.Nos.288/1 and 288/4 at Manjampettai Village, Gandhavarkottai Taluk, Pudukottai District based on the representation made by the petitioner on 12.04.2021.

¶25

2.The main ground that was urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the assignments were granted in favour of the petitioner and others through proceedings of the Tahsildar, dated 01.05.1975 and thereafter, all these assignments were unilaterally cancelled through proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 08.05.2002. This proceedings became subject matter of challenge before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.245 of 2004 and the proceedings were quashed by this Court by order dated 20.02.2005 by granting liberty to the authority to afford

¶26

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

¶27

2/6

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶29

opportunity to the concerned persons before cancelling the assignment patta.

¶30

3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said order passed by this Court will enure to this petitioner also. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also brought to the notice of this Court that in a judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.20 of 2004 that was filed by one of the assignees, a specific reference was made to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.245 of 2004. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Civil Court had given a finding that since the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 08.05.2002 was quashed by this Court, the effect of that will enure in favour of all the other persons, in whose favour assignment was made.

¶31

4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents seeks some time to get instructions in this regard.

¶32

5.Post this case under the caption “for orders’ on 20.11.2023.”

¶33

3.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Special Government Pleader produced the written instructions received from the third respondent. The relevant portions in the written instructions are extracted hereunder:

¶34

“ fe;jth;Nfhl;il jhYfh> kQ;rk;Ngl;il fpuhk Gy vz;fs; 288/1 kw;Wk; 288/4 KiwNa gug;G 0.41.0 Vh;]; fpuhk fzf;Ffspy; GQ;ir jhpR vd;w tifghl;by; cs;sJ. Nkw;gb tof;F njhlh;ghf Gyj;jzpf;if nra;jjpy; tof;fpd; kDjhuh; jpUkJ %f;fhap vd;gth; Rkhh; 40 Mz;L fhykhf Nkw;fz;l Gyj;jpid mDgtk; nra;J tUfpwhh; vd;gJ tprhuizapy; njhpfpwJ. Nkw;gb Gyj;jpy; A+f;ylg;]; gaph;nra;Js;shh;. Nkw;gb Gyj;jpid kDjhhpd; mDgtj;ij mbg;gilahf nfhz;L mtuJ ngahpy; gl;lh

¶35

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

¶36

3/6

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶38

toq;fyhk; vd;gjhy; ghpe;J nra;J Nfhl;lhl;rpah; mYtyfj;jpw;F mwpf;if mDg;g eltbf;if Nkw;nfhs;sg;gLk;.”

¶39

4.It is clear from the written instructions that the petitioner was found to be in continuous possession and enjoyment of the subject property for nearly four decades and is also doing agricultural activities in the property and therefore, a recommendation has been made to restore the patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject property.

¶40

5.In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to act upon the report submitted by the third respondent and to restore the patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject property. This process shall be completed by the second respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶41

Index :Yes / No 20.11.2023 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No

¶42

4/6

¶43

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

¶44

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶45

cmr

¶46

¶47

1.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Pudukkottai District

¶48

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkottai District

¶49

3.The Tahsildar, Gandharvakottai Taluk Office, Pudukkottai District.

¶50

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

¶51

5/6

¶52

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶53

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶54

cmr

¶55

W.P.(MD)No.13476 of 2021

¶56

20.11.2023

¶57

6/6

¶58

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

Mukayee v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukayee v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devanan Vs The District Collector

Selvi .R Vs the Assistant Divisional Engineer

Jaishankar.K, Vs The District Collector

Prabakaran Chelliah Vs the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Devendranath.B Vs the Registrar

E.R.Higher Secondary School Society (19/2004) Vs the Inspector General of Registration