Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
Gopal Naicker & Sons, Represented by Harikrishnan – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Land Administration (FAC), Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: WP No.17027 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining to the proceedings No.E3/15827/2019 dated 27.10.2020 issued by the first respondent, confirming the proceedings No.R.C.No.J6/65759/1995 dated 19.06.2019 issued by the second respondent and quash the same.
WP No.66 of 2021 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining to the proceedings of the first respondent herein bearing No.E3/ 15827/2019 dated 27.10.2020 confirming the proceedings of the second respondent in proceedings bearing No.J6/65759/1995 dated 19.06.2019 and quash the same.)
Common Order:
The lis on hand has been instituted questioning the validity of the Appellate Order passed by the first respondent-Commissioner of Land Administration in proceedings dated 27.10.2020 confirming the proceedings of the District Collector dated 19.06.2019 ordering for resumption of the land belonging to the Government.
2. The petitioner is the Partnership Firm. The petitioner-Partnership Firm states that they are the absolute owners of the land measuring 25
The Court emphasized the duty of the Authorities to protect the financial interest of the State and the importance of periodic review of Government largesse.
Government actions must be in conformity with reason and public interest. The Government cannot act arbitrarily and must act for the public good.
Writ jurisdiction is inappropriate for adjudicating disputes regarding property titles; such matters should be resolved through civil courts.
The lawful possession of land cannot be violated by the State without due process; failure to acquire legally results in trespass, warranting restoration or formal acquisition proceedings under const....
An order made without jurisdiction is null and void, reinforcing the established property rights in land ownership disputes under the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958.
Continuous enjoyment of property does not confer ownership without valid title, especially when the land is classified as Government Poramboke.
The resumption of land under Section 3-B cannot be solely based on observations of land lying fallow; substantial evidence of actual non-use for its intended purpose is required.
Extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and can be denied due to unreasonable delay in seeking relief.
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
