State appealed against a writ order directing patta transfer and CBI inquiry regarding land in Kancheepuram. The Division Bench set aside the CBI direction, held the respondents remain owners since acquisition was quashed, directed consideration of their patta application under the Patta Pass Book Act, and allowed fresh land acquisition proceedings.
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.A.No.637 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.03.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
Writ Appeal No.637 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.4535 of 2024
Chennai – 600 009.
4.The Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Taluk Office, Kanchipuram. ... Appellants
Vs.
1.S.Banumathi 2.Shankara Narayanan 3.S.Sathya Narayana ... Respondents
Page No.1 of 10
Prayer:
W.A.No.637 of 2024
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 30.01.2024 made in W.P.No.32485 of 2023.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Ramanlaal Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader For Respondents : Mr.P.Dineshkumar
J U D G M E N T
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM)
The writ appeal has been instituted against the order dated 30.01.2024 passed in W.P.No.32485 of 2023.
W.A.No.637 of 2024
Writ Court to register a case by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is beyond the scope of the writ proceedings. More so, the Government has already initiated action to acquire the said land for the purpose of implementing the scheme for the benefit of Adi-Dravidar Community.
Affidavit filed in the writ proceedings, it was not considered. Therefore, the State as preferred the present writ appeal.
Page No.3 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
the owner is entitled to submit an application for grant of Patta. In the present case, the acquisition proceedings initiated originally under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, 1978 was quashed by the High Court. Since the land acquisition proceeding was quashed, the erstwhile owner of the land became the owner. Therefore, based on the application submitted by the respondents 1 to 3, necessary changes are to be effected in the Patta Passbook.
that a fresh acquisition proceedings are proposed to be initiated.
Page No.4 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
be commenced. Therefore, the respondents 1 to 3 are the owners of the subject property as on today. Thus, the appellants have to make necessary changes in the Patta Passbook based on the application submitted by the respondents 1 to 3 under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Pass Book, Act. After initiation of land acquisition proceedings, the Authorities are empowered to conclude the same and thereafter, make necessary changes and implement the scheme for the benefit of the Adi-Dravidar Community, as per the earlier decision of the Government.
Vs. Union of India and Ors. reported in (2024) SCC Online SC 15 held as follows:
“33. Recently, in Himanshu Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, this Court, speaking through one of us
Page No.5 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
(J.B.Pardiwala, J) relying on a judgment of a three-judge Bench of this Court in K.V.Rajendran v. Superintendent of Police reiterated the principle that the power to transfer an investigation to Investigating agencies such as the CBI must be invoked only in rare and exceptional cases. Further, no person can insist that the offence be investigated by a specific agency since the plea can only be that the offence be investigated properly. The Court held as follows:
“49. Elaborating on this principle, this Court further observed:
'17.....the court could exercise its
constitutional powers for transferring an investigation from the State investigating agency to any other independent investigating agency like CBI only in rare and exceptional cases. Such as where high officials of State authorities are involved, or the accusation itself is against the top officials of the investigating agency thereby allowing them to influence the investigation, and further that it is so necessary to do justice and to instil confidence in the investigation or where the investigation is prima facie found to be tainted/biased.'
50. The Court reiterated that an
Page No.6 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
investigation may be transferred to the CBI only in 'rare and exceptional cases'. One factor that courts may consider is that such transfer is imperative to retain public confidence in the impartial working of the State agencies. This observation must be read with the observations made by the Constitution Bench in the case of State of West Bengal v.Committee for protection of Democratic Rights, that mere allegations against the police do not constitute a sufficient basis to transfer the investigation.
52. It has been held by this court in CBI v.Rajesh Gandhi, that no one can insist that an offence be investigated by a particular agency. We fully agree with the view in the aforesaid decision. An aggrieved person can only claim that the offence he alleges be investigated properly, but he has no right to claim that it be investigated by any particular agency of his choice.
53. The principle of law that emerges from the precedents of this court is that the power to transfer an investigation must be used sparingly and only in exceptional circumstance. In assessing the plea urged by the petitioner that the investigation must be transferred to the CBI,
Page No.7 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
we are guided by the parameters laid down by this court for the exercise of that extraordinary power.” (emphasis supplied).
34. Given the above position of law, the question that arises before the court is whether, in the facts of the present case, the transfer of investigation from the Securities and Exchange Board of India to another agency is warranted.”
Page No.8 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
W.P.No.32485 of 2023 is set aside. The appellants are at liberty to initiate fresh land acquisition proceedings in the manner contemplated under law. In the meanwhile, the application already filed by the respondents 1 to 3 under the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act is to be considered for effecting necessary changes.
[S.M.S.J.] [K.R.S.J.] 20.03.2024
Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No veda
Page No.9 of 10
W.A.No.637 of 2024
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. AND K.RAJASEKAR,J.
veda
Judgment in W.A.No.637 of 2024
20.03.2024
Page No.10 of 10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Single Judge's direction for CBI investigation was sustainable in a writ petition seeking patta transfer?
Whether respondents as legal heirs of erstwhile owner were entitled to changes in the Patta Passbook after quashing of acquisition proceedings?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vishal Tiwari Vs. Union of India and Ors.Relied on¶11
(2024) SCC Online SC 15 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary, Adi-Dravidar Welfare Department
The District Collector, Kanchipuram District
The Tahsildar, Walajabath
The Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Taluk Office, Kanchipuram
S.Banumathi
Shankara Narayanan
S.M.Subramaniam
K.Rajasekar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
