A Writ of Mandamus requires a judicially enforceable right, which the petitioner lacked after executing the sale deed, thus the petition was dismissed except for the payment of the remaining sale consideration.

ORDER :

This writ petition has been filed seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 11.10.2022 and to execute a release deed in his favour by releasing the property measuring acres 9.09 cents comprised in S.No.357, Mudalipalayam Village, Kangayam Taluk.

2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General assisted by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is as follows :

(i) The petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject property. For the purpose of providing free house sites under the Adi Dravidar Welfare Scheme, the respondents entered into a private negotiation with many land owners including the petitioner. Vide proceedings dated 06.8.1996, the third respondent submitted proposals to the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Erode District for the purchase of lands through private negotiations. In that process, the third respondent recommended the land value at Rs.1 lakh per acre. Based on the proposal given by the third respondent, a Committee was constituted and the Committee decided to purchase the lands by means of private negotiations at the rate of Rs.1.75 lakhs per acre.

(ii) Accordingly, in respect of the subject property, the petitioner executed a sale deed dated 30.10.1996 registered as document No. 2239 of 1996 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Kangeyam in favour of the first respondent for a total sale consideration of Rs.15,90,750/-. However, only a part payment of Rs.9,74,000/- was paid to the petitioner on 11.2.1997. Later, several complaints were received alleging serious irregularities in fixing the land value through private negotiations. Hence, the District Collector, Erode passed an executive order dated 04.9.1999 stating that the sale deed dated 30.10.1996 was cancelled and that the subject property was returned back to the petitioner.

(iii) Aggrieved by such other decisions taken by the first respondent, the petitioner and others filed W.P.No.17048 of 1999 etc. cases before this Court and ultimately, they were partly allowed by a common order dated 02.8.2000 by a learned Single Judge of this Court quashing the order cancelling the sale deeds. However, the request of land owners for payment of balance sale consideration was rejected. Further, this Court also granted leave to the official respondents to file a civil suit seeking for the cancellation of the sale deeds.

(iv) Pursuant to the said common order of this Court, nearly six suits came to be filed before the concerned Sub-Courts. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, O.S.No.259 of 2000 was filed before the Sub-Court, Dharapuram by the first respondent and the District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Erode for cancellation of the said sale deed dated 30.10.1996 and for a direction to the petitioner to repay back the sum of Rs.9,74,000/- together with interest. However, the said suit came to be dismissed by the Sub-Court, Dharapuram vide judgment and decree dated 27.10.2003. Further, all the connected suits were also dismissed by the concerned Sub-Courts.

(v) Aggrieved by the judgments and decrees of the Trial Courts, six appeals were filed before this Court. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, A.S.No.308 of 2005 was filed. In respect of A.S.Nos.1111 and 1243 of 2004 and 309 of 2005, the Government decided to release the properties involved to the respective land owners by way of cancellation of the registered sale deeds. As a consequence, only three appeals in A.S.Nos.887 of 2003, 966 of 2004 and 308 of 2005 were contested.

(vi) In so far as A.S.Nos.966 of 2004 and 308 of 2005 were concerned, a Division Bench of this Court heard the submissions made on the side of the private individuals and recorded that the matters have been settled between the parties as the land owners obtained a release deed from the Government and accord