Violation of the principles of natural justice.

V. Ramaswami, J.

1. In this writ petition the petitioner has questioned the validity of a notification of the Collector of Madurai dated 5th October, 1975 under Section 1(2)(iii) of the Tamil Nadu Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949, declaring among others, the following Survey Numbers 753/1, measuring 529.22 acres; 753/3 measuring 328-69 acres; 856 measuring 195.45 acres; 857/3 measuring 287.86 acres situate in Sirumalai Village, Madurai District, as private forest within the meaning of that Act. The petitioner had also mentioned in his petition that S. No. 857/1 measuring 398.06 acres as having been notified in the same notification. But we find that the notification gives the survey number as 817/1, though the extent is given as 398.06. Since the notification gives survey number as 817/1, we cannot assume that there is any mistake in giving the survey number and if really the Government considers that there is a mistake, the Government will have to give an erratum and if only such erratum is given and the lands are brought under the Preservation of Private Forests Act, the petitioner can be stated to be aggrieved and therefore I am considering the relief claimed in this writ petition with reference to survey numbers 753/1, 753/3,856 and 857/3 alone.

2. These survey numbers originally formed part of Ammayanaickanur Zamin estate which was notified and taken over on 3rd January, 1951 under the Estates Abolition Act XXVI of 1948. Ryotwari settlement was also introduced in fasli 1369. One Kanakasabapathy and four others applied for a ryotwari patta in respect of these survey numbers under Section 11(a) of the Abolition Act. On such application being made, the Assistant Settlement Officer considered the question as to whether the land in respect of which the ryotwari patta was claimed, is a forest land and ultimately held that it was a forest land and ordered the survey numbers to be registered as forest under Section 63 of the Act. The aggrieved persons filed appeals to the Director of Survey and Settlements. By an order dated 15th May, 1966 in A. P. No. 3 of 1964, the Director of Survey and Settlements held that the lands in question are not forest lands and set aside the order of the Assistant Settlement Officer and remanded the matter for considering the claim of the aggrieved persons under Section 11 of the Act. Though the matter was considered by the Assistant Settlement Officer again and then went in Appeal and revision and again back to the Assistant Settlement Officer, finally the Settlement Officer, Madurai, after an inspection of the lands, allowed ryotwari patta in respect of the lands now in question. Against that order of the Settlement Officer, Madurai, the District Forest Officer, Madurai filed a revision to the Director of Survey and Settlements contending that the lands, are forest lands. The revision petition was dismissed holding that the question whether the lands are forest or not had already been concluded and that applicants were also entitled to the ryotwari patta under Section 11 of the Act. The District Forest Officer again filed a revision to the Board of Revenue and the revision also was dismissed on 2nd March, 1973. After the District Forests Officer failed in this battle which lasted over a decade, he seems to have invited the Collector to invoke his powers under the Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949 and to declare the lands as private forest and that is how the present impugned notification came to be made. The petitioner filed a revision to the Government praying for cancellation of the notification and to permit the petitioner to reclaim the lands for growing coffee, cocoa, pineapple, mango, spices like pepper caradamom, cloves, etc., That revision petition was dismissed by the Government in their memorandum dated 4th August, 1977. It is in these circumstances that the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Section 63 of the Abolition Act provides that where any question arises