Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
V. DHANAPALAN
S. Viswanathan
Versus
The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District & Others
W.P.No.18489 of 2009
Decided on : 01-07-2011
Patta Transfer - Land Dispute - Patta Passbook Act, Sections 10, 12, 13 - The court discussed the provisions of the Patta Passbook Act, specifically Sections 10, 12, and 13, and their application in the case. The court highlighted the jurisdiction of the Tahsildar as the original authority for patta transfer, the appellate authority of the Revenue Divisional Officer, and the provision for revision. The court emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedures and the limitations on the exercise of authority by different officials. The decision was influenced by the interpretation of these legal provisions and the finding that the impugned orders suffered from legal infirmity.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash an order transferring patta in favor of a community organization, challenging the order as contrary to the Patta Passbook Act and issued without following natural justice principles. The respondents argued that the lands belonged to the community and the transfer was valid.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order transferring patta was without jurisdiction and illegal, as it was passed by an authority not empowered to do so. The court emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedures and the limitations on the exercise of authority by different officials.
Issues: The main issue was whether the order transferring patta was valid and in accordance with the Patta Passbook Act and principles of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the impugned order transferring patta was without jurisdiction and illegal, as it was passed by an authority not empowered to do so. The court emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedures and the limitations on the exercise of authority by different officials.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned orders and directed the transfer of patta to the name of the plaintiff in the civil suit, as per the judgment and decree therein. The writ petition was allowed on the above terms.
1. This writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order dated 26.08.2009 passed by the 2nd respondent viz., the Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District in proceedings No.Ref. NA.KA.A2.2123/2009 whereby, orders have been issued to delete the name of S.Viswanathan from patta No.445 and register the name of Sengunthar Samudhaya Nala Sangam, the 4th Respondent herein, in patta No.445 in respect of Survey No.181/1 in Keelkodungalur Village, Vandavasi Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District, of an extent of 3.65.0 Hectares and consequent to the said order, the third Respondent viz., the Tahsildar, Vandavasi, has carried out the changes in patta No.445 on 1.9.2009.
2. According to the petitioner, he is a Member and Representative of Keelkodungalur Sengunthar Samudhaya Marabinar (in short 'Samudhayam'), Keelkodungalur Village, Vandavasi Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. Dry land measuring an extent of 9.02 Acres comprised in Survey No.181/1 of Keelkodungalur Village is being enjoyed by the petitioner Samudhayam for more than 100 years and the members of the Samudhayam are all along paying kist to the Revenue Department. The live fence trees growing in the said lands are being sold and the amount is being utilized for various social welfare activities like construction of a public well for drinking purpose, Marriage Community Hall etc. The 3rd Respondent/Tahsildar, Vandavasi, discreetly issued patta in respect of the said land in favour of the local temple during the implementation of the UDR Scheme and the Assistant Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment, Vellore (hereinafter referred to as the 'HR & CE Department') auctioned the live fence trees in the said lands. Knowing the fact that the petitioner Samudhayam represented by S. Viswanathan filed a suit in O.S.No.749 of 1991 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Arni against the Respondents 1 and 3 viz., the District Collector, Tiruvannamalai District and Tahsildar, Vandavasi Taluk and the Assistant Commissioner of HR & CE Department, Vellore for declaration that the auction of the live fence trees by the HR & CE Department is illegal and also for a mandatory injunction directing the respondents 1 and 3 to issue patta in favour of the petitioner Samudhayam and for permanent injunction restraining the HR & CE Department from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner Samudhayam in the said lands. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner Samudhayam on 25.11.1997.
2a. While so, the petitioner Samudhayam represented by the deponent Mr.S.Viswanathan pursuant to the civil suit decree, submitted an application to the third Respondent Tahsildar for issuance of patta in their favour. Thereafter, the third Respondent in his proceedings Ref.NA.KA.A5.707/98 dated 07.04.1998 issued patta in favour of the petitioner Samudhayam. The petitioner has been paying kist in respect of the said lands for the past 11 years on behalf of their Samudhayam and the income derived from the sale of live fence tress in the said lands are being utilized for various social activities and it has also requested the Government to construct a Hospital in a portion of the said lands. The petitioner has been protecting and safeguarding the lands by instituting suit, obtaining patta and paying kist. In order to grab the said lands by illegal methods, few persons formed a group under the banner of "Sengunthar Samudhaya Nala Sangam" in the year 2008, submitted a representation to respondents 1 to 3 herein to transfer the patta in respect of the said lands in favour of the newly formed "Sengunthar Samudhaya Nala Sangam" Reg. No.32/2008 (hereinafter referred to as "Nala Sangam') as if the patta in respect of the said land was issued in the individual name of the deponent of the affidavit (S. Viswanathan).
2b. Further, the petitioner's case is that after knowing the illegal move of respondents 4 and 5, their Samudhayam instituted a suit i
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
