Dismissed¶¶38

Amalraj.K v. The Principle Secretary

Madras HC6 Aug 2025WP(MD)/3738/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

free housesite patta; SC/ST welfare scheme; Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribe; clause 4(d) condition; G.O.(Ms) No.34 dated 13.01.2021; Revenue and Disaster Management Department LD3(1); restriction on alienation; sale only to SC/ST person after 10 years; non-discrimination challenge; Article 226 certiorarified mandamus; Article 15(4); Revenue Standing Orders; Ramanathapuram; Kattuparamakudi; Keela Muthukulathur Village; petitioner real estate broker; cost Rs.50,000 imposed; writ petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; writ petition dismissed and connected miscellaneous petition closed; cost of Rs.50,000/- imposed on the petitioner, payable within two weeks directly to the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Ramanathapuram. ¶¶38

Amalraj.K Vs The Principle Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the condition imposed in clause 4(d) of G.O.(Ms) No.34, Revenue and Disaster Management Department (LD3(1)), dated 13.01.2021 — preventing beneficiaries of free housesite pattas granted to SC/ST persons from selling the property for 10 years and thereafter permitting sale only to SC/ST persons — is discriminatory and liable to be declared void. +1 more

¶¶27

Court's answer

The scheme is a special scheme for the benefit of SC/ST people; free housesites are allotted for dwelling purpose to protect livelihood, and special conditions are imposed to protect beneficiaries' interests and to prevent sale to third parties which would defeat the very purpose of the welfare scheme; therefore the conditions cannot be construed as discriminatory.

¶¶31

Ratio / Principle

The impugned clause 4(d) stipulates that after the conditional assignment period of 10 years is over, the beneficiary can sell the land to another SC/ST person only and not to anybody else; the intention is that lands allotted to SC/ST people must be occupied by people of the same community, and the Government is empowered to impose such conditions; the petitioner's ground of discrimination is untenable.

¶¶32

Key takeaways

While implementing special schemes for SC/ST people and landless poor, the Government necessarily has to impose conditions to ensure successful implementation and protection of the beneficiaries' interests.ratio¶¶36
The petitioner has not made out any acceptable grounds for considering the relief; the writ petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed.ratio¶¶38
Since the petitioner was identified as a real estate broker who unnecessarily questioned the welfare scheme implemented for the benefit of SC/ST people, the Court imposed a cost of Rs.50,000/- on the petitioner, to be paid within two weeks directly to the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Ramanathapuram, to be utilised for providing basic amenities to children studying in the Adi Dravidar Welfare High School, Sengapadai, Kamuthi Taluk.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) dismisses a writ petition under Article 226 challenging clause 4(d) of G.O.(Ms) No.34, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Disposal Wing [LD3(1)], dated 13.01.2021, which barred beneficiaries of free housesite pattas granted to SC/ST persons from selling the allotted property for 10 years and thereafter permitted sale only to another SC/ST person. Held: the scheme being a special welfare scheme for SC/ST people, special conditions protecting beneficiaries' interests and preventing alienation to third parties cannot be construed as discriminatory; lands allotted to SC/ST people are intended to be occupied by the same community and the Government is empowered to impose such conditions, which are also available under the Revenue Standing Orders; the petitioner's discrimination ground is untenable. The Court recorded the fourth respondent's counter that the petitioner is a real estate broker, found no acceptable grounds, dismissed the writ petition, and imposed a cost of Rs.50,000/- on the petitioner payable to the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Ramanathapuram, for amenities of children of the Adi Dravidar Welfare High School, Sengapadai. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.08.2025

¶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.3738 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD)No.3518 of 2023

¶8

K.Amalraj ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Director / Commissioner of Land Administration, Kuralagam, Chennai.

¶12

3.The Commissioner of Adi-dravidar Welfare, Chennai-600 005.

¶13

4.The District Adi-Dravidar Welfare Department, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

¶14

5.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District. ...Respondents

¶15

1/8

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶18

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in G.O.Ms.No.34/2021 dated 13.01.2021 issued by the Revenue and Disaster Management Department Land Disposed Wing (LD3(1)/1 section/1st Respondent herein, condition imposed 4(d) and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 02.2023 in Survey No.120/IB1, 120/12, Keela Muthukulathur Village, Muthukulathur Taluk, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muniasamy For R1 to R5 : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Government Pleader

¶20

ORDER

¶21

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

¶22

The lis on hand has been instituted to assail the Clause 4(d) in G.O(Ms) No.34, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Disposal Wing, [LD3(1)] Section, dated 13.01.2021.

¶23

The petitioner states that free housesite pattas are granted to the eligible member of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes citizens. The lands

¶24

2/8

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶27

are acquired for the benefit of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people and free housesite pattas are granted based on the eligibility criteria fixed under the welfare schemes and also in consonance with the Revenue Standing Order. The scheme in the present case was implemented in Kattuparamakudi and free housesite pattas are granted to the eligible Adi Dravidar people. The petitioner would state that the conditions imposed in clause 4(d) of G.O.(Ms) No.34, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Disposal Wing, [LD3(1)] Section, dated 13.01.2021 is causing discriminations since the beneficiaries are prevented to sell the property within a period of 10 years and even after while selling the property it must be to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people. Such condition is causing discrimination and therefore, it is to be declared as void.

¶28

The scheme itself is a special scheme implemented for the benefit of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people. When the scheme by itself is a special scheme, some special conditions are imposed to protect the interest of the beneficiaries, who belongs to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes community. The free housesites are allotted for dwelling purpose and the idea of the Government is that their livelihood is to be protected. In the event of not 3/8

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶31

imposing any such conditions, there is a likelihood of selling the free housesites to the third parties, which would defeat the very purpose and objective of the welfare scheme of the Government. The conditions are imposed to meet the objective of the special scheme, therefore, it cannot be construed as discriminately. In the present case, the impugned clause 4(d) stipulates that "after the conditional assignment period of 10 years is over, the beneficiary can sell the land to another SC / ST person only and not to anybody else."

¶32

The very intention under the welfare scheme is to ensure that such lands acquired and allotted to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people must be occupied by the people from the same community. That being the purpose and object for which the lands are acquired, then the Government is empower to impose such conditions in order to protect the interest and well being of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes peoples on allotment of free housesite patta. The ground regarding discrimination raised by the petitioner is untenable. The condition has been imposed to meet out the objective. More so, even under the Revenue Standing Orders, such conditions are made available then the free housesite pattas are granted to the landless poor people under the welfare scheme. The Government is empower to implement the special schemes for the

¶33

4/8

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶36

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people and for landless poor. While implementing the scheme, the Government necessarily has to impose condition to ensure that the schemes are implemented successfully and the interest of the beneficiaries are also protected.

¶37

The fourth respondent in his counter has stated that the writ petitioner is a real estate broker dealing in the business of sales of lands and other transactions. The present writ petition is filed for personal gains and in order to purchase the lands from the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people and sell the same to the third parties. The conditions imposed under Clause 4(d) is in consonance with Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India.

¶38

The petitioner has not made out any acceptable grounds for the purpose of considering the relief. Thus, the writ petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

Since the petitioner is identified as a real estate broker and filed this petition unnecessarily questioning the welfare scheme implemented for the benefit

¶40

5/8

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶43

of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes people, this Court is inclined to impose a cost of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), which is to be paid by the petitioner. The cost is directed to be paid by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today directly to the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Ramanathapuram, who in turn shall utilise the funds for providing basic amenities to the children studying in the Adi Dravidar Welfare High School, Sengapadai, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶44

(S.M.S., J.) & (A.D.M.C., J.) 06.08.2025

¶45

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No am

¶46

6/8

¶47

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

¶48

W.P.(MD)No.3738 of 2023

¶49

¶50