Petitioner challenged Sub Registrar order halting land registration for exceeding ceiling limits. Court held order passed without initiating proceedings under Land Reforms Act and quashed it.
Writ of Certiorari issued calling for records and directing quashal of dated 29.09.2020 order.
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.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024 and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.19138 and 19139 of 2024
Dr.Muthukumar ... Petitioner
/vs./
1.The Additional Collector, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin.
3.The Sub Registrar, Kayathar, Tuticorin District 628 952. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in its Na.Ka.No.M1/14081/2017 dated 29.09.2020 and quash the same.
1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Vijayashankar
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
For Respondents : Mr.P.Thambidurai Government Advocate
ORDER
Without even initiating proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, the order dated 29.09.2020, which is impugned in the writ petition, has been passed by the third respondent on the instructions of the second respondent.
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
Section 20A of the Act. The first respondent had instructed the third respondent
that till such time the formalities under the Land Reforms Act were completed or the excess ceiling limit regularized under Section 37A or B of the Act, registration of lands should not be accepted. The Sub Registrar gave a copy of the said letter dated 29.09.2020 to the petitioner. It is only then that the petitioner became aware of the facts. Hence, the writ petition.
3/6
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
proceedings and identifying the surplus land in the property, the communication and the act of the third respondent pursuant to the same cannot be countenanced. As and when the ceiling proceedings are initiated, it is well open to the petitioner to approach the respondents after coming to the conclusion pursuant to the enquiry that the petitioner was holding the lands in excess of ceiling limit, the respondents can proceed to injunct the property from further alienations.
connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
| Speaking | : Yes / No |
|---|---|
| NCC | : Yes / No |
| Internet | : Yes / No |
| Index | : Yes / No |
29.10.2024
mm
To
4/6
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
5/6
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
P.T.ASHA, J.
mm
W.P.(MD) No.22598 of 2024
29.10.2024
6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether communication by Sub Registrar to petitioner about excess land holding without initiated proceedings under Act can be countenanced.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Dr.Muthukumar
The Additional Collector, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin
The Authorized Officer (Tamil Nadu Land Reforms), Tuticorin District
The Sub Registrar, Kayathar, Tuticorin District 628 952
P.T.Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
