S.Vadivelsamy Vs The District Collector

W.P.No.8412 of 2023 PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned order dated 03.02.2023 vide Na.Ka.No.1771/2023/Y-8

¶23

of the 4th respondent and to quash the same, consequently direct 2nd respondent to update the petitioner's details of plot No.32 for S.No.286, 312/2 to an extent of 0.03 acres in the name of the petitioner in online chitta of Amanireddihalli Village, Dharmapuri Taluk, Dharmapuri Disrict.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.V.C.Janarthanan for Mr.M.Selvam For R1 to R4 : Mr.A.Selvendran, Special Government Pleader For R5 : No appearance

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order

¶27

dated 03.02.2023 insofar as it finds that the assignment patta issued in

¶28

favour of the petitioner’s mother was bogus/fake pursuant to an enquiry th made on the representation by the 5 respondent.

¶29

2/11

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.No.8412 of 2023

¶32

2. Brief Facts:

¶33

2.1. Property (private patta dry lands) comprised in Survey No.286

¶34

and 312/2, measuring an extent of 0.59.5 and 0.65.5 hectares, situated at

¶35

Ammanireddihalli Village, Dharmapuri Taluk and District was acquired

¶36

by the Government vide Award No.4/BC/8485 dated 29.03.1986 for the

¶37

purpose of assigning lands to people belonging to Boyar Community (Most Backward) residing in the said region. Pursuant to the above acquisition, “free assignment house site patta” was issued to 6 7 beneficiaries admeasuring 3 cents or 1308 sq.ft., each. Possession was handed over to the beneficiaries in 1986 and 1993 along with assignment

¶38

patta. Assignment patta was conditional, inter alia required beneficiaries

¶39

on receiving "free house site patta" to construct a dwelling house within a

¶40

period of 6 months thereof. Plot No.32, comprised in Survey No.286 and 312/2, measuring an extent of 0.03 acres, situated in Ammanireddihalli Village, Dharmapuri Taluk and District, (hereinafter referred to as "subject plot") under the said scheme was allotted to one

¶41

3/11

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.No.8412 of 2023

¶44

Mrs.Mookammal measuring an extent of 0.03 acres.

¶45

2.2. Petitioner would submit that after being assigned the subject

¶46

plot his mother was in possession and enjoyment of the subject plot and

¶47

executed a Will dated 22.11.1999 in favour of the petitioner. The said

¶48

Will is stated to be registered. Petitioner would also submit that after h is mother’s demise, petitioner had been in continuous possession of the subject plot. In support thereof, he would submit that in the UDR Register

¶49

his mother's name has been entered and he has been paying revenue tax

¶50

and had obtained electricity connection in respect of the subject plot. Petitioner would further submit that he submitted an application on 06.12.2018 for transfer of patta in his name before the 2 nd respondent in nd respect of the subject plot. 2 respondent passed an order on 13.12.2018 directing patta be transferred in the name of petitioner. Despite the above order, revenue records of Amani r eddihalli Village was not mutated. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.30592 of

¶51

4/11

¶52

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

¶53

W.P.No.8412 of 2023

¶54

2022, wherein it was prayed that direction may be issued to update the

¶55

petitioner's details in the name of petitioner in online chitta of Ammanireddihalli Village. This Court vide order dated 17.11.2022 rd nd directed 3 respondent therein to implement the order passed by 2

¶56

respondent therein within a period of 12 weeks, if there is no legal

¶57

impediment.

¶58

2.3. Whileso, 5 th respondent submitted a representation at the Public

¶59

Grievance Meeting day dated 23.01.2023, wherein it was stated that the th actual beneficiary was the 5 respondent and petitioner and his mother th has encroached on the subject plot allotted to the 5 respondent. Pursuant th to the above representation, 4 respondent has vide impugned order dated

¶60

th 03.02.2023, on enquiry with the petitioner and the 5 respondent found th that the claim by both petitioner as well as the 5 respondent as beneficiaries under the Government Scheme which provided for allotment of "free house site patta" to Boyar Community was bogus and the pattas submitted in support of their claim is fake.

¶61

5/11

¶62

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

¶63

W.P.No.8412 of 2023 th 2.4. It is this order of the 4 respondent which is the subject matter

¶64

in the present writ petition inter alia on the following grounds:

¶65

th a) 4 respondent has erroneously passed the impugned order

¶66

without considering the documents submitted by the petitioner.

¶67

th b ) 4 respondent passed the impugned order without properly

¶68

appreciating the facts on hand.

¶69

th c) 4 respondent also failed to consider the submissions and

¶70

statements of the petitioner and his mother Mookammal before passing

¶71

the impugned order.

¶72

th d) 4 respondent failed to consider the Will executed by his mother

¶73

in favour of the petitioner.

¶74

th e) 4 respondent failed to consider that the petitioner is paying the

¶75

revenue tax and the petitioner is under possession of Plot No.32.

¶76

3. To the contrary, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 would

¶77

inter alia submit that patta was not issued to petitioner's mother.

¶78

6/11

¶79

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

¶80

W.P.No.8412 of 2023

¶81

Petitioner herein and his parents did not belong to Boyar Community

¶82

instead they belong to Nadar Community which falls under Backward

¶83

Class category. Free House Site Scheme was intended only for those

¶84

belonging to Boyar Community, which falls under the category of Most

¶85

Backward Class.

¶86

4. On a perusal of the impugned order dated 03.02.2023 the

¶87

following reasons have been set out viz.,

¶88

a) Mookammal who was assigned patta under the above scheme

¶89

had four children.

¶90

b) Mookammal's husband name was Shanmugaiah.

¶91

c) Documents submitted by petitioner would show that his father’s

¶92

name is shown as Shanmuga Nadar in the Aadhaar Card, Family Card ,

¶93

Mookammal's Death Certificate etc.

¶94

th d) With regard to 5 respondent's claim it was found to be bogus th since the 5 respondent Mookammal was stated to have no children by

¶95

one Krishnan who claims to be her guardian and having taken care of the 7/11

¶96

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

¶97

W.P.No.8412 of 2023

¶98

th 5th respondent for the last 17 years or so, that by itself led the 4

¶99

th respondent to find that the 5 respondent was not the actual beneficiary.

¶100

Further enquiry with the neighbour would also reveal that 5th respondent

¶101

had been living in Hogennakkal and seeking alms and only for the last 6

¶102

months was living with her relatives.

¶103

5. This Court find merit in the submission of learned counsel for

¶104

petitioner, for it it does not appear from the reading of the impugned order

¶105

that the petitioner was not put on notice of the reasons stated supra to

¶106

respond nor any enquiry has been conducted with the petitioner as to the

¶107

genuineness of the documents submitted by the petitioner in support of

¶108

his claim for assignment patta including UDR register, the receipts, etc.

¶109

The impugned order not having afforded any opportunity to the petitioner

¶110

to deal with the reasons which prompted passing of the impugned order

¶111

suffers from violation of principles of natural justice.

¶112

6. In view thereof the impugned order is set aside. Respondents

¶113

8/11

¶114

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

¶115

W.P.No.8412 of 2023 shall pass orders afresh as expeditiously as possible after holding an

¶116

enquiry and after affording petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

¶117

It is open to the petitioner to submit their explanation/response along with

¶118

the supporting documentary evidence, if any, in support thereof treating the impugned order as notice. Until the orders are passed, there shall be an order of status quo.

¶119

7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶120

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶121

24.11.2025

¶122

Index : yes/no Internet : yes/no Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order spp

¶123

9/11

¶124

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