Dismissed¶30

C.Munusamy v. the Commissioner

Madras HC5 Nov 2025WA/3397/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court Division Bench (S.M. Subramaniam J., author; Mohammed Shaffiq J.) dismisses WA No. 3397 of 2023 filed by C. Munusamy against The Commissioner Land Administration Department and others (Dharmapuri district officials). Keywords: re-conveyance/reconveyance of acquired land, mutation of revenue records, Section 48B Old Land Acquisition Act, land acquired for Harijan/Adi Dravida welfare, award No.6/ADW/98-99 dated 09.07.1998, rejection Proceedings dated 29.07.2022 by District Collector Dharmapuri, confirmation of Single Judge order dated 30.08.2022 in WP.No.22574 of 2022, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Re-conveyance of acquired land cannot be claimed as an absolute right; reconveyance of acquired land is a discretion to be exercised by the Government. ¶28

C.Munusamy Vs the Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

WA No. 3397 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 05-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

¶6

WA No. 3397 of 2023

¶7

C.Munusamy

¶8

Appellant(s)

¶9

¶10

The Commissioner Land Administration Department, Ezhilagam Chepauk, Chennai 05

¶11

2.The Commissioner Adi-dravida Welfare Commissionerate, Ezhilagam Chepauk, Chennai 05

¶12

3.The District Collector Office of the Collectorate, Dharmapuri District-636 705.

¶13

4.District Adi Dravida And Tribal Welfare Officer Collectorate Office Campus, Dharmapuri District - 636 705.

¶14

Respondent(s)

¶15

PRAYER

¶16

To set aside the order passed by the Learned Judge in WP.No.22574 of 2022 dated 30.08.2022 on the file of this Court and allow this Writ Appeal.

¶17

For Appellant(s): Ms.S.Bhuvaneshwari for Mr.G.Selvaraj

¶18

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

¶19

WA No. 3397 of 2023

¶20

For Respondent(s): Mrs.Akila Rajendrean, Government Advocate for R1 - R4.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶23

The intra-court appeal on hand has been instituted by the writ petitioner. Writ Petition has been instituted challenging the rejection order passed by the District Collector to r-econvey the acquired land and for a direction to mutate revenue records in favour of appellant.

¶24

It is not in dispute between parties that subject land involved in present intra-court appeal had been acquired under Land Acquisition Act for Harijan Welfare, and an award was passed on 09.07.1998 in award No.6/ADW/98-99. The appellants are not challenging land acquisition proceedings, and the said proceedings completed in all respects. After lapse of few years, appellants submitted representation to District Collector seeking re-conveyance of acquired lands. District Collector, Dharmapuri vide Proceedings, dated 29.07.2022 rejected the claim of appellants. Thus, writ petition came to be instituted.

¶25

Writ Court considered the issues and found that lands were acquired for benefit of Adidravidar people. That apart, Section 48B conferring power on Government to re-convey land at its discretion is no longer in existence. Therefore, claim of appellants/writ petitioners cannot be considered.

¶26

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

¶27

WA No. 3397 of 2023

¶28

This Court is in agreement with the reasoning given by Writ Court. Re-conveyance of acquired land cannot be claimed as an absolute right. Reconveyance of acquired land is a discretion to be exercised by Government. That apart, said provision under Section 48B of Old Land Acquisition Act is no longer in existence. Therefore, the claim of the appellants to re-convey acquired land at this distance of time cannot be considered by this Court.

¶29