Ramachandra Iyer, J.-

These are applications under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ mandamus and certiorari respectively to direct the respondent to forbear from interfering with the petitioner’s right, possession and enjoyment of the Melakulam and Appasamudram tanks within the limits of what was once Idayakottai zamin in Palani taluk in Madurai district, and to call for the records and quash the order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Madurai, in R.A. No. 19-1953, dated 14th July, 1953, which affirmed the order of the Settlement Officer, Madurai, dated 29th September, 1952, made in Case Nos. 9 to 14 PLN 51, holding that a ryotwari patta in respect of the tanks referred to above could not be granted to the petitioner. In view of the general importance of the questions raised, these petitions have been posted before a Full Bench.

The petitioner was the zamindar of Idayakottai which is situated in Palani taluk in Madurai district. The zamin was notified as a zamindari estate and taken over by the Government on 3rd September, 1951, under the provisions of the Madras Estates (Abolitition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act (XXVI of 1948), which shall hereinafter be referred to as the Abolition Act or the Act. In due course the petitioner filed an application before the Settlement Officer, Madurai, under section 12 (a) of the Act for the grant of a ryotwari patta with respect to several items of lands which he claimed as his private or pannai lands. Amongst the several items claimed were two tanks in the village known as Melakulam and Appasamudram. As the village has not yet been surveyed the tanks could be identified only by their Paimash numbers. Melakulam is covered by P. Nos. 330 and 331, while Appasamudram is covered by P. Nos. 489 and 490. In the village accounts they are mentioned and classified as water spread and tank bund area. The Settlement Officer granted a patta in respect of a number of items but rejected the claim of the petitioner in regard to the two tanks.

The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the Settlement Officer under section 15 (2) of the Abolition Act, to the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Madurai. The Tribunal found that the two tanks came into existence long prior to Act I of 1908 on what was once the zamindar’s pannai lands, but that they ceased to be the private lands on their being converted as tanks and that therefore the petitioner would not be entitled to the issue of ryotwari pattas in respect of them. The petitioner has thereupon moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for the reliefs aforesaid.

In Srinivasa Rao v. State of Madras1, a Bench of this Court held that where a tank was an accessory to or part and parcel of the private lands of a landholder, he would be entitled to the grant of a ryotwari patta for the tank under section 12 (a) of the Act: The correctness of that decision has been challenged before us by the learned Advocate-General on behalf of the Government.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that where a landholder constructed on what were his private lands a reservoir for storing water for irrigating exclusively his private lands whether the reservoir was a well or a tank the lands so utilised for the reservoir would continue to be the private lands either as an ancillary to the remaining private lands or as part and parcel thereof. It was, therefore, urged that the landholder would be entitled to the grant of a patta in regard to the tanks as they formed really part of the other private lands in respect of which he was entitled to have a ryotwari patta.

Idayakottai was a zamin village governed by the provisions of the Madras Estates Land Act (I of 1908). It is not disputed that the two tanks of Melakulam and Appasamudram occupy a portion of what originally formed part of the private lands landholder and that the ayacut under the tanks is entirely comprised of the private lands of the landholder. None of the ryots of the zamindari

Click Here to Read the rest of this document