Allowed¶30

V.Munitha v. The State of Tamil nadu

Madras HC24 Apr 2025WP/4091/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patta rejection order quashed; land classified as allotted to depressed class; Survey No.524/3B, Plot No.39, Green Park Avenue, Vadamambakkam Village, Arakkonam Taluk; Sub Collector (I/C) Arakkonam; Tahsildar Arakkonam; writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226; rejection without notice or reasons; remand for enquiry and fresh final orders within six weeks; predecessor-in-title patta; A.S.No.108 of 1991 dated 26.11.2001; W.P.No.2541 of 2013 dated 21.04.2014; Ranipet District.

What did the court decide?

Impugned rejection order dated 24.01.2020 of the 2nd respondent quashed; matter remanded to the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry, afford the petitioner an opportunity to submit all relevant documents, and pass final orders within six weeks; writ petition allowed with no costs. ¶30

V.Munitha Vs The State of Tamil nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the rejection order dated 24.01.2020 of the 2nd respondent, refusing patta for the subject property in Survey No.524/3B on the ground that it is classified as land allotted to depressed class, was validly passed and liable to be quashed. +1 more

¶23

Court's answer

If the 2nd respondent needed any clarifications, a notice should have been issued to the petitioner to enable submission of all relevant documents; instead, the rejection order was passed without assigning any reason, merely stating that the lands are allotted to depressed class.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

There are materials to show that the lands stood in the name of private individuals, undermining the depressed-class allotment classification relied on for the rejection.

¶28

Key takeaways

The impugned rejection order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the 2nd respondent is quashed.ratio¶29
The matter is remanded to the 2nd respondent, who is directed to conduct an enquiry, afford the petitioner an opportunity to submit all relevant documents, and pass final orders within six weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶29
The writ petition is allowed with the above terms; no costs awarded.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (N. Anand Venkatesh, J.), in W.P. No. 4091 of 2020 (V. Munitha v. State of Tamil Nadu and others), allowed the writ petition and quashed the rejection order dated 24.01.2020 (Na.Ka.A4/2055/2019) passed by the Sub Collector (I/C), Arakkonam, refusing patta for Plot No.39, S.No.524/3B, Vadamambakkam Village, Arakkonam Taluk, on the sole ground that the land was classified as allotted to depressed class. Holding that notice should have been issued to the petitioner if clarifications were needed, and that the rejection was passed without assigning reasons despite materials showing the lands stood in the names of private individuals, the Court remanded the matter to the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry, afford the petitioner an opportunity to submit all relevant documents, and pass final orders within six weeks. No costs.

¶1

W.P.No.4091 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.04.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

W.P.No.4091 of 2020

V.Munitha

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by District Collector, Ranipet District.

¶11

2.The Sub Collector (I/C), Arakkonam, Ranipet District.

¶12

3.The Tahsildar, Arakkonam Taluk, Arakkonam. .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent made in Na.Ka.A4/2055/2019 dated 24.01.2020 and quash the same and to direct the 3^rd respondent to grant patta in respect of petitioner's property having an extent of 1800 sq.ft bearing Plot No.39, comprised in S.No.524/3B, Vadamambakkam Village, Arakkonam Taluk known as Green Park Avenue after subdividing the same in the name of petitioner in the light of judgment of this Court made in A.S.No.108 of 1991 dated 26.11.2001.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Jeremiah

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.4091 of 2020

¶18

For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.M.R.GokulKrishnan Additional Government Pleader

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned

¶21

rejection order passed by the 2^nd respondent dated 24.01.2020 and for a consequential direction to the 3^rd respondent to grant patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the subject property.

¶22

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶23

3.The application submitted by the petitioner seeking for patta has been rejected through the rejection order dated 24.01.2020 on the ground that the subject property in Survey No.524/3B has been classified as lands allotted to depressed class.

¶24

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the land cannot be classified as the lands allotted to depressed class in view of the judgment passed by the competent civil court and also due to the fact that patta originally stood in the name of the predecessor in title. The learned counsel also placed reliance upon the order passed by this Court in 2/5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.4091 of 2020

¶27

W.P.No.2541 of 2013 dated 21.04.2014.

¶28

5.In the considered view of this Court, if the 2^nd respondent needed any clarifications, a notice should have been issued to the petitioner to enable the petitioner to submit all the relevant documents before the 2^nd respondent. Instead, the 2^nd respondent has passed the rejection order, without assigning any reason and by merely stating that the lands in question are allotted to depressed class. Whereas there are materials to show that the lands stood in the name of private individuals.

¶29

6.In the light of the above discussion, the impugned rejection order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the 2^nd respondent is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the file of the 2^nd respondent and the 2^nd respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry and afford an opportunity to the petitioner to submit all relevant documents. Thereafter, final orders shall be passed, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶30

7.In the result, the writ petition is allowed with the above terms. No

¶31

costs.

¶32

3/5

¶33

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

¶34

W.P.No.4091 of 2020

¶35

24.04.2025 (1/5)