Back
2019 Supreme(Mad) 1257
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
K. Marichamy and Others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu and Others – Respondents
W.P. Nos. 19438 to 19440 of 2013
Decided On : 07-06-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Kandan Duraisamy for R. Sasikumar.
For the Respondents: B. Anand, T. Sreelekha.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the Tahsildar to consider the legal provisions, compliance with assignment conditions, and follow the procedures under the Patta Pass Book Act while granting patta.
Headnote:
Land Reforms - Patta Issue - Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Disposal and Surplus Land) Rules, 1965, Patta Pass Book Act, 1983 - Section 94 of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 - Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Disposal and Surplus Land) Rules 1965 - Section 3 of the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983 - [Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Disposal and Surplus Land) Rules, 1965, and the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. It highlighted the compliance requirements for land assignment, the procedure for granting patta, and the appeal and revision mechanisms under the Patta Pass Book Act. The court emphasized the need for the Tahsildar to consider the legal provisions while granting patta and set aside the unreasoned order for fresh consideration.]
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioners sought patta for land assigned to them under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961. Despite compliance with assignment conditions, the Tahsildar rejected the patta applications citing objections from third parties. The petitioners challenged the rejection orders before the court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners had complied with the assignment conditions and were entitled to patta. It set aside the unreasoned rejection orders and directed the Tahsildar to reconsider the matter in light of the relevant legal provisions.
Issues: The issues involved the rejection of patta applications by the Tahsildar despite compliance with land assignment conditions and the need for the Tahsildar to consider the legal provisions while granting patta.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Tahsildar's rejection of patta without considering the legal provisions and compliance with assignment conditions was unjustified. It emphasized the need for the Tahsildar to follow the procedures under the Patta Pass Book Act and set aside the unreasoned order for fresh consideration.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the rejection orders, and directed the Tahsildar to reconsider the matter in accordance with the relevant legal provisions within four weeks.
Prayer in WP No. 19438/13: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na. Ka. 3417/2011/A3 dated 28.03.2013 and quash the same and directing the 3rd respondent to issue patta for 0.50 cents in Survey No. 646/IB of Matuvarayapuram village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore, already assigned to the petitioner.
In WP No. 19439/13: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na. Ka. 3416/2011/A3 dated 28.03.2013 and quash the same and directing the 3rd respondent to issue patta for 0.70 cents in Survey No. 640/ICI of Matuvarayapuram village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore, already assigned to the petitioner.
In WP No. 19440/13: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in Na. Ka. 3416/2011/A3 dated 28.03.2013 and quash the same and directing the 3rd respondent to issue patta for 0.50 cents in Survey No. 646/IC of Matuvarayapuram village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore, already assigned to the petitioner.
1. Since the issues involved in three petitions are common and the facts more or less same, all the 3 writ petitions are tagged together. This Court on 17.07.2013, while passing the order of Status Quo passed the order (19438 to 19440 of 2013) reads as under:-
"The writ Petitioners were earlier given allotment by the Government vide order dated 31.5.1990. The petitioners nave been in possession and enjoyment of the respective land on the strength of the orders of allotment. The petitioners, after completing the payment of installments, pursuant to the orders of allotment, requested the respondents to grant patta. Since the said request was not considered, the petitioners approached this Court. Thereafter, the issue was considered by the third respondent.
The revenue officials recommended the case of the petitioners for issuing patta by observing that they have been in possession and enjoyment of the property and there is no objection for granting patta. However, the third respondent rejected the application on the ground of objections from third party. The petitioners are therefore before this Court challenging the order passed by the third respondent.
2. The orders of allotment produced by the petitioners indicate that the lands were given to them by the Government. The related proceedings of the revenue officials also prima facie indicate the possession of the property by the respective petitioners.
3. The order passed by the third respondent, prima facie does not take into consideration the original assignment and the subsequent proceedings initiated by the revenue officials pursuant to the request made by the concerned petitioners for giving patta.
4. The matter requires consideration after the appearance of respondents.
5. Mrs. P. Kavitha, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of respondents nos. 1 to 6. Issue notice to the seventh respondent returnable by 19.8.2013. Private notice is also permitted.
6. Mrs. P. Kavitha, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of respondents nos. 1 to 6. Issue notice to the seventh respondent returnable by 19.08.2013. Private notice is also permitted.
7. There shall be an interim order to maintain status-quo of the property."
2. The writ petitioners were assigned land bearing Survey Nos. 646/IB, 640/ICI and 646/IC under Section 94 of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961. The petitioners have paid the amount mentioned in the assignment order. The petitioners made representations to the Joint Commissioner, Land Reforms, after completion of 20 years from the date of allotment requesting the authorities to issue permanent patta as prescribed in the order of assignme
