Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.

This writ appeal arises out of the order passed by the learned single Judge, whereby learned single Judge dismissed the petition filed by the appellant herein upholding the order passed by the Government in respect of the vesting of lands to the share of the respective respondents.

2. An abstract outline of the facts, which led to to the filing of the writ appeal is outlined hereunder :-

The lands, bearing Survey No.164/1, which is the subject matter of the present appeal, of an extent of 5 acres, situated in Thazhambur Village, Kelambakkam Firca, which is a portion out of the 600 acres of lands purchased by one Perumalsamy Reddy in a Court auction sale during the year 1929, stood vested with the Government under the Tamil Nadu Estate Abolition Act, 1948 (Act 26 of 1948). By virtue of the Settlement Proceedings, the lands were classified as Anadheenam lands, as there were no claimants for the said lands over a very long period of time. Therefore, the lands, on being classified as assessed dry waste, was assigned to political sufferers by the Tahsildar, Chengalpet. In the said assignment, the above survey No.164/1 in Thazhambur Village, Chengalpet Taluk was assigned in favour of one B.S. Radhakrishnan, vide proceedings dated 7.6.1966. After the said assignment, patta was obtained by the said Radhakrishnan and he was in enjoyment of the said lands until the execution of the sale deed in favour of the appellant in the year 1974 vide Document No.74 of 1974 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Tiruporur. Since the purchase of the lands in the year 1974, the appellant is in continuous enjoyment of the land with full right over the said lands.

3. The 7th respondent herein, son of Perumalsamy Reddy, based on an oral partition said to have been arrived at between his father and his brothers, after the death of the said Perumalsamy Reddy, applied for patta in respect of the share of the said Perumalsamy Reddy. However, rejection of the said claim by the Government entailed the 7th respondent herein to approach this Court by filing W.P. Nos.6165, 6125 and 7346 of 2000, wherein this Court, vide order dated 13.5.03 observed that patta in respect of the lands in survey No.164/1 had wrongly been given to the 7th respondent inspite of the orders passed by this Court and the Government in view of the fact that the lands in the said survey No.164/1 had already been assigned to one Radhakrishnan.

4. The 7th respondent herein, in view of the grant of patta by the 6th respondent, sold the property in Survey No.164/1 to respondents 8 to 13. No notice before the grant of patta in favour of the 7th respondent was issued to the appellant, insofar as survey No.164/1 is concerned, which land has been allotted to the political sufferers and stands excluded from the consideration of lands for which patta can be granted. Further, the 7th respondent was called upon by the 4th respondent to furnish the list of lands, which the 7th respondents intends to hold from out of the entire extent as permissible under the Land Reforms Act to which the list, as furnished by the 7th respondent disclose inclusion of Survey No.174/1. The above act came to light only when respondents 8 to 13 started preparing a layout, whereupon the appellant instituted a complaint with the Police authorities under the land grabbing laws. On enquiry by the police authorities, respondents 8 to 13 produced a copy of the order passed by the 4th respondent, only at which point of time the appellant came to know of the said order and, therefore, the writ petition was filed before this Court.

5. On notice, the respondents appeared before the Court and contended that the petitioner/appellant had no locus standi to question the said order as the petitioner has no vested right or title over the land as the assignment granted in favour of the said Radhakrishnan, from whom the petitioner/appellant had purchased the lands, had been cancelled by the Government for non-compliance