Ratios:
a. Where the income from a trust is substantially appropriated for the benefit of its founder, his heirs, family of the founder or their heirs, such trust shall be a private trust.
b. Public trust is a trust established for the purpose of religious charity or of educational nature.

T.S. Sivagnanam J

The above writ petitions have been filed challenging a common order passed by the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms, Special Appellate Tribunal in SRP Nos. 21 and 26 of 1999.

2. SRP No. 21 of 1999 was filed by Sowcar Welfare Fund Family Trust (hereinafter referred to as Welfare Fund Family Trust) challenging the order passed by the Land Tribunal Chennai dated 30.10.1998 in LTCMA No 39 of 1997.

3. SRP No. 26 of 1999 was filed by Sowcar Gopaldas Dwarakadas Private Family Trust (hereinafter referred to as Private Family Trust) challening the order passed by the Land Tribunal, Chennai in LTCMA No. 29 of 1998 dated 30.04.1999.

.4. The common issue which arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to whether the Welfare Fund Family Trust and Private Family Trust are "Private Trust" as defined under Section 3 (36)-A of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms or whether both the Trusts are to be considered as "Trusts" within the definition under Section 3 (36)-AAA of the Act.

5. The factual background in SRP No. 21 of 1999, is that the Welfare Fund Family Trust held agriculture lands at Srirangam to an extent of 46.24 ordinary acres equivalent to 25.806 standard acres as on 01.03.1972. Since the total holdings of the Trust exceeded the ceiling limit, notice in Form No. 4 was issued to the land owner Trustee together with a statement showing the total holding by the Trustee as on the crucial date 01.03.1972, informing them to file objections, if any, on or before 210. 1973 and also to appear for enquiry on 310. 1973. On 112. 1973, objections were filed stating that the Trust is a Religious Trust of public nature. Accordingly, an order was passed by the Authorised Officer on 03.09.1974. The land owner filed an appeal before the Land Tribunal, Thanjavur in LTCMA No. 130 of 1974 and the Tribunal, in its order dated 28.04.1976, set aside the order of the Authorised Officer and remanded the matter to the Authorised Officer for fresh consideration. The land owner did not appear for enquiry on remand. Therefore, an order was passed under Section 9 (2)(b) of the Act on 30.08.1978, treating the trust as Public Charitable Trust. An appeal was filed before the Land Tribunal, Thanjavur against such order in LTCMA No. 146 of 1980 which came to be dismissed on 211. 1981. The Trust filed a Revision before this Court in CRP No. 2306 of 1985 which was subsequently transferred to Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Special Appellate Tribunal. The Special Appellate Tribunal, in TRP No. 148 of 1991, by order dated 110. 1992 remanded the matter to the Authorised Officer with a direction to conduct a detailed enquiry, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner Trust to produce oral and documentary evidence and to decide the nature of the Trust. As per the direction, notices were issued by the Authorised Officer to the Trustee of the Welfare Fund Trust and an enquiry was conducted. After giving sufficient opportunity and based on the documents produced, an order was passed on 010. 1997 under Section 9(2)(b) of the Act. This order was challenged by the land owner by filing an appeal in LTC RA/39/97 which was dismissed by an order dated 30/10/1998. This order is the subject matter of SRP No. 21 of 1999.

.6. The factual background in SRP No. 26 of 1999 is that an extent of 30 standard acres was allowed to be retained by the Family Trust as on 06.04.1960. A notice in Form No. 2 was issued to the Family Trust and was asked to submit their objections on or before 25.05.1982, furnishing the particulars of the land, held by the Trust as on 01.03.1972. The Trust did not file their Form 2 return as directed and hence notice in Form No. 4 was issued with a statement showing the total extent of lands held by them as on 01.03.1972 and called upon them to file objections on or before 20.10.1982. The 2nd respondent herein posted the enquiry to 210. 1982 which was adjourned to 212. 1992. The representative of the petitioner appeared on the adjourned date and