The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging a proposed allotment of land for SC/ST colony houses. The Court observed that it had previously held in a related matter that the petitioner was a trespasser as possession had been handed over to beneficiaries, rendering the current plea unsustainable.
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.7608 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
K.Narayanan ... Petitioner -vs1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2.The District SC/ST Welfare Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 3.The Tahsildar SC/ST Welfare, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 to cancel the proposal for allotting the agriculture land for houses sites.
_____________ Page 1 of 7_
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sekar
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan, Addl.Govt.Pleader.
ORDER
The petitioner's land in Survey No.18/1 to an extent of 2 Acres 47 Cents, situated in Karunsuthi Village, Ilayankudi Taluk, Sivagangai District, in Patta No.769, was acquired by the Government in the year 1988 for the purpose of welfare scheme of constructing colony houses for Adi-Dravidars. While so, as the Government did not take possession of his lands and also because no steps were taken in furtherance of the object of the acquisition, the petitioner submitted a representation, dated 30.06.2009. to the Government to return his lands. As the petitioner's representation was not considered, the petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No.11706 of 2009, and this Court, vide order, dated 16.11.2009, disposed of the said Writ Petition, directing the respondents therein to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation. Thereafter, the third respondent rejected the petitioner's representation, directing him to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner, as per the aforesaid direction of the third respondent, approached the second respondent. As no orders were passed by the second respondent, the petitioner again approached this Court in W.P.(MD) No.4801 of 2014 for a
Page 2 of 7
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
direction to the second respondent to dispose of his appeal on merits. This Court, by an order dated 19.03.2014, directed the second respondent to dispose of the petitioner's appeal within a period of six weeks and, thereafter, the second respondent, on 29.10.2014, passed an order, stating that there was a proposal to construct houses for SC/ST community and, hence, the petitioner's request could not be considered. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No.5642 of 2015.
Page 3 of 7
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
to drop the proceedings in so far as his lands are concerned should be allowed.
Page 4 of 7
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
with the petitioner even after acquisition. This Court, on the basis of the submissions of the respective counsels in W.P.(MD) No.5642 of 2015, rejected
the plea of continuous possession of the petitioner and held that the petitioner's possession of the lands, if any, amounted to trespass. This Court also recorded the submission of the Government Counsel that the lands were handed over to the beneficiaries.
21.11.2024
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No
dixit
To:
Page 5 of 7
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
Page 6 of 7
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
N.MALA, J.
dixit
W.P.(MD) No.7608 of 2018
21.11.2024
Page 7 of 7
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a proposal for allotting agricultural land for house sites under a welfare scheme should be cancelled due to the petitioner's continuous possession since the original acquisition.
Whether the plea of continuous possession by the petitioner bars the authorities from proceeding with the construction of colony houses for SC/ST community after an inordinate delay.
K.Narayanan
The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai
The District SC/ST Welfare Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai
The Tahsildar SC/ST Welfare, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District
N.MALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
