The judgment emphasizes the importance of providing evidence, both oral and documentary, to support claims in cases involving mixed questions of facts and law.

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners through their Power Agent, for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the classification and re-settlement of Survey No.41/1 of an extent of 3 hectare 63.0 ares equivalent to 8 acres 97 cents at No.82, Peramanur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District under the UDR Scheme from the file of the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently to direct the 3rd respondent to issue patta to the petitioners and respondents 5 to 17 regarding their lands.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the dry land measuring to an extent of 8 acres 97 cents in S.No.41/1 in No.82, Peramanur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk, was originally owned by one late Ramasubbiah. The said property was gifted by the then British Government in the 19th century to the said Ramasubbiah along with Grama Mirasi rights. Ramasubbiah died in the year 1915 leaving behind his three sons, viz., Munusamyaiah, Venkatasubbiah and Venkataramaiah. After his demise, the said three sons partitioned the property among themselves as their absolute property. Due to various circumstances, the family, which was living in Peramanur village, slowly migrated to various places due to their own avocations and jobs and ultimately, the cultivation process in the said land came to a standstill. The petitioners herein are the descendants of late Ramasubbiah. Since the lands were not duly cultivated and only Velikathan trees and shrubs were grown, no assessment was collected from the families. While so, the Government of Tamil Nadu developed the nearby lands and converted them into forest to grow various forest trees and the development of forest lands was carried out around the petitioners’ patta land. The petitioners ancestors in the family had already earmarked their patta lands in Survey No.41 positively by planting palmyrah trees and putting black survey stones to denote the borders as far as possible. The authorized village map clearly shows the clear demarcation of the forest land and patta land of the petitioners, which they derived from their ancestors.

3. It is the further case of the petitioners that on verification, the petitioners came to know that their land measuring to an extent of 8 acres 97 cents in S.No.41/1, in No.82 Peramanur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk, was wrongly described as though included into the forest land as S.No.41, old Survey No.41/1 measuring 3 Hectares 63 ares in forest land. On coming to know of such wrong description, an application was submitted to the Commissioner of Land Administration at Chepauk-the 1st respondent, to grant a patta to their land stating that the land has already been gifted to Ramasubbiah a century back and that the nearby forest could not be put against the petitioners patta land or be shown as forest land and therefore, the description as forest land is without any basis and truth. Subsequently, the petitioners sent another representation dated 17.03.2006 to the Tahsildar, Chengalpattu, the 3rd respondent herein, praying for grant of patta. Thereafter, yet another representation dated 06.11.2006 was sent to the 4th respondent, the District Forest Officer, Kancheepuram, to issue a no objection certificate for grant of patta in respect of S.No.41/1 to an extent of 8 acres 97 cents in Peramanur Village. Though the Forest Range Officer at Chengalpattu had recommended to issue a no objection certificate, the 4th respondent-the District Forest Officer replied that unless the revenue department cancels their wrong classification, the no objection certificate cannot be issued. The petitioners have no other alternative remedy except to approach this Court by invoking the writ jurisdiction for the relief as stated above.

4. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners made elaborate arguments by producing the Re-survey and Resettlement Register pertaining to the year 1911 that the s