Dismissed

R.S.Lakshmi, v. the District Collector

Madras HC14 Jul 2025WP(MD)/20583/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the District Collector's order rejecting their applications for free house site patta under a welfare scheme on the ground that their income exceeded the ceiling fixed in G.O.Ms.No.287 dated 31.05.2000. The Court held free house site patta is a welfare measure, not an absolute right, and found no infirmity in the rejection.

What the court decided

AI extract

R.S.Lakshmi, Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 14.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

¶7

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018 and

¶8

W.M.P(MD)No.18970 of 2018

¶9

1.R.S.Lakshmi 2.T.S.Gunasekaran 3.K.S.Usha 4.J.Ponithavathi 5.R.S.Vijaya 6.T.K.Lakshmipriya 7.R.V.Subhasini 8.R.S.Gokila 9.R.Manikandan ... Petitioners

¶10

vs.

¶11

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶12

2.The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai.

¶13

1/6

¶14

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

¶15

3.The Tahsildar,

¶16

3.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thirunagar, Madurai.

¶17

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶18

4.The Tahsildar, Madurai Taluk, Y.Othakkadai, Madurai.

¶19

... Respondents

¶20

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the impugned order passed by the first respondent vide Na.Ka.No. 13162/201/J4 dated 21.08.2018 and quash the same as illegal and direct the first respondent to allot free house site patta to all the applicants in Madurai District or any other nearby places.

¶21

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Ramachandran For RR 1 to 4 : Mr.V.Om Prakash Government Advocate

¶22

ORDER

¶23

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

¶24

The Writ Petition has been instituted challenging the order of the first respondent/the District Collector, Madurai dated 21.08.2018.

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶28

2.The petitioners had submitted applications seeking free house site

¶29

patta under a Government welfare scheme. Since no action was initiated, the petitioners filed W.P(MD)Nos.4262 to 4266 of 2018, 4541, 7351, 7354 & 7522 of 2018 and this Court disposed of the Writ Petitions directing the District Collector, Madurai to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders. Accordingly, the District Collector, Madurai, conducted an enquiry after affording due opportunity to the parties and passed the impugned order dated 21.08.2018.

¶30

3.The order impugned reveals that as per the Government Order in

¶31

G.O.Ms.No.287, Revenue Ni.Mu.1(2) Department, dated 31.05.2000, an annual income ceiling has been fixed. A person earning more than the prescribed ceiling is not eligible to avail the benefit of a free house site patta under the Government welfare scheme. Since the District Collector, Madurai found that all the applicants were earning over and above the income ceiling fixed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.287, Revenue Ni.Mu.1(2) Department, dated 31.05.2000, their applications were rejected.

¶32

3/6

¶33

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

¶34

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶35

4.A free house site patta can never be claimed as an absolute right. It

¶36

is a welfare measure and therefore, the eligibility criteria fixed by the Government is to be scrupulously followed. Free house site pattas are granted only to the homeless poor people and therefore, the income criteria is of paramount importance.

¶37

5.In the present case, the petitioners were found to be earning over and above the ceiling fixed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.287, Revenue Ni.Mu.1(2) Department, dated 31.05.2000. Therefore, this Court does not find any infirmity in respect of the decision taken by the District Collector, Madurai or in the reasons furnished in the order impugned.

¶38

6.In view of the above reasons, this Writ Petition stands dismissed.

¶39

There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶40

[S.M.S.,J.] & [A.D.M.C.,J.] 14.07.2025 (3/7)

¶41

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes ps 4/6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶44

¶45

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶46

2.The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai.

¶47

3.The Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram Taluk, Thirunagar, Madurai.

¶48

4.The Tahsildar, Madurai Taluk, Y.Othakkadai, Madurai.

¶49

5/6

¶50

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

¶51

W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶52

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.

¶53

¶54

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.20583 of 2018

¶55

DATED : 14.07.2025 (3/7)

¶56

6/6

¶57

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

R.S.Lakshmi, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

R.S.Lakshmi, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Venkatesan Vs The District Collector / Monitoring Committee

R. Rajaselvan Vs Mr.Harmandhar Singh

G.Sundar @ Sundaram Chettiar Vs The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine

Karthikeyan P Vs The Secretary to Government

A.Velusamy Vs The District Collector

Ganesan Vs The District Collector