The authority exceeded its jurisdiction by ignoring binding civil court decrees and misclassifying lands as poromboke, violating principles of natural justice.

ORDER :

1. As the issue in both these Writ Petitions is common, with the consent of the learned Counsel in both the matters, the Writ Petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of, by this common order.

2. The case of the writ petitioners in W.P.(MD)No.1662 of 2020 is that they belong to Nair Tarwad. They trace title to one Neelakanda Pillai, Chellapan Pillai. The name of the Tarwad was Chathancode Veedu alias Chathankottu Veedu, which Tarwad was entitled to 18 hectares 66 ares [equivalent to 46 acres and 9 cents] comprised in Old Survey Nos.2022A and 2022B in Lekkom No.47, formerly Vilavancode village, then Palukal Village.

3. A suit was filed in O.S.No.38 of 1089 (M.E.), which corresponds to 1913/1914 A.D., on the file of the District Judge, Nagercoil. The suit was filed for declaration of title and possession of the properties which have been wrongly included in the Government records as poramboke lands. After contest, by judgment dated 14.09.1915, the District Judge, Nagercoil decreed the suit, thereby declaring the title of the Tarwad of the plaintiffs, holding that the lands were not poramboke lands and also directed issue of patta in favour of the Tarwad of the plaintiffs.

4. It is the further case of the plaintiffs that after re-organization of the States, in terms of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, the subject lands became part of the then Madras State with effect from 01.11.1956. The father of the writ petitioners joining hands with others of the Chanthancode Veedu, filed O.S.No.7 of 1961, before the Sub-Court, Padmanabapuram and obtained delivery of portions of the property in Old Survey No.2022A and 2022B, which was in the possession of the defendants in the said suit. Thereafter, the father of the petitioners, Chellappan Pillai and others filed yet another suit in O.S.No.441 of 1989, on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Kuzhithurai, against the State of Tamil Nadu represented by its District Collector, Kanyakumari and also the Tahsildar, Vilavancode, seeking relief of permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with the writ petitioners' father's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject lands in Old Survey Nos.2022A and 2022B. Pending the said suit, Chellappan Pillai died and the writ petitioners were brought on record as plaintiffs in the said suit. Ultimately, the suit also came to be decreed on 06.02.1998, in favour of the petitioners.

5. The further case of the writ petitioners is that the said Old Survey Nos.2022A and 2022B came to be resurveyed as Re-Survey No.422 and on bifurcation of Palukal village, thereafter, the property in Re-Survey No.422 was situated in Malayadi Village.

6. It is also the specific case of the petitioners that the Government of Tamil Nadu took a gift of 3 cents by way of a registered Gift Deed dated 10.06.1998, which was executed by one Arthur son of Sreedharan, in which Gift Deed there is specific mention of Old Survey Nos.2022A and 2022B, being re-assigned re-survey No.422. The said Gift Deed was registered as Document No.900 of 1998, on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Palukal. Placing strong reliance on the said Gift Deed, the petitioners contend that Old Survey No.2022A and 2022B and then re-survey No.422 was only patta lands and not poromboke lands as being contended by the respondents. In fact, it is also the case of the petitioners that pursuant to the various decrees in the civil suits, patta was mutated in the name of the father of the petitioners in Patta No.4682. However, ignoring all these material documents, the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration has held otherwise and passed the impugned order.

7. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners have been in absolute possession and enjoyment of the subject lands and portions of the same have also been alienated after effecting registered Partition Deeds amongst the co-owners on 29.04.1991 as well as 05.12.1996. In fact, one of the purchas