SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 4493

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
J. NISHA BANU, S. SRIMATHY, JJ.
The District Collector, Dindigul and Ors. – Appellants 
Versus
K. Lakshmananperumal – Respondent 
W.A(MD) No.41 of 2025 and C.M.P(MD) No.289 of 2025
Decided On : 24-06-2025


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Veera Kathiravan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mrs. D. Farjana Ghousia, Special Government Pleader.
For the Respondent: Mr. H. Mohammed Imran for M/s. Ajmal Associates

Longstanding possession and judicial affirmations of land exclusion from forest status support the issuance of a patta, regardless of governmental classifications.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 - Section 4 - Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 - Writ of Mandamus directing issuance of patta for land - Respondent historically in possession and cultivation of land since before 1977 forest notification - Government failed to appeal prior favorable decisions regarding land's status - The land’s classification as ‘Sarkar Poramboke - Forest’ does not preclude issuance of patta upon exclusion from the reserve - The Writ Court's order directing the issue of patta is upheld - No jurisdictional challenge exists against the Tahsildar’s authority in this instance. (Paras 3, 7, 10, 14)

(B) Judicial Precedent - The prior decisions need not be further challenged for them to be binding and effective - Established possession under a Zamin-issued patta allows for valid title against government claims. (Paras 5.6, 11)

Facts of the case:
The respondent, a landholder, sought patta issuance for land erroneously included in a forest notification. His continual possession, historical cultivation, and favorable earlier judgments resulted in entitlement to patta despite ongoing classification disputes. The relevant government orders confirmed the land's exclusion from forest status.

Findings of Court:
Judicial decisions affirming the land's exclusion from forest classifications were binding; the respondent’s longstanding, lawful possession warranted the issuance of a patta without any further challenge.

Issues: The case primarily addressed whether the land, despite its prior classification, could warrant patta issuance given the respondent's continuous possession and the context of earlier favorable decisions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that longstanding possession and affirmation of legal right through previous judgments created an entitlement to patta despite bureaucratic classification concerns; authority of the Tahsildar not in question given established legal precedents.

Result: Writ Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. writ petition for patta issuance based on past rulings. (Para 2 , 3)
2. government's argument about forest land classification. (Para 5)
3. writ petitioner's established claim to land ownership. (Para 6)
4. court recognizes longstanding possession and legal decisions favoring the writ petitioner, affirming the single judge's order. (Para 7)
5. court recognizes prior rulings on the writ petitioner's rights. (Para 10 , 11)
6. court's discretion under article 226 based on longstanding possession. (Para 12 , 13)
7. writ appeal dismissed; court finds no error in lower court's decision. (Para 14)

JUDGMENT :

(J. NISHA BANU, J.)

Challenging the order passed by the Writ Court dated 28.10.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.25552 of 2024, the respondents as appellants have filed the present Writ Appeal.

2. The respondent/writ petitioner filed the writ petition seeking the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the fourth respondent to issue a patta in his favour in respect of Survey No.695/Part, to an extent of 15 acres and 65 cents situated at Sirumalai Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District, in light of the judgment dated 06.12.1985 in C.M.A. No.20 of 1985 on the file of the District Court, Dindigul, and in light of G.O. Ms. No.84, Environment, Climate Change- Forest (FR.14) Department, dated 02.05.2022.

3. Short facts, shorn of elaboration, are as follows:

3.1. The writ petitioner is in possession of 15 acres and 65 cents of land in S.No.695/Part at Sirumalai Village, Dindigul East Taluk, inherited from his predecessors, who had cultivated banana, lemon, coffee, and other crops on the said land. A preliminary notification under Section 4 of the TAMIL NADU FOREST ACT , 1882, was issued on 31.08.1977, proposing to constitute the Sirumalai West Forest Block-1 over 22,204.49 acres, which mistakenly included the writ petitioner’s land.

3.2. The writ petitioner filed Claim No.14 of 1978 before the Forest Settlement Officer, Dindigul, seeking exclusion of his land, but the claim was rejected on 07.09.1979. The writ petitioner appealed in C.M.A. No.90 of 1982 before the District Judge, Madurai North, who, on 06.10.1982, directed the Forest Settlement Officer to reconsider the matter. Upon reconsideration, the Forest Settlement Officer, on 30.04.1985, excluded the writ petitioner’s land from the proposed reserve forest area. An appeal by the District Forest Officer in C.M.A.No.20 of 1985 before the District Court, Dindigul, was dismissed on 06.12.1985, affirming the Forest Settlement Officer's decision.

3.3. Subsequently, the Special Tahsildar/Forest Settlement Officer submitted a proposal on 29.10.2010, and a revised proposal on 13.02.2017, to exclude the writ petitioner’s land. This was approved, and by order dated 02.05.2022, the Government officially declared the remaining area as Reserve Forest, effective 08.06.2022, excluding the writ petitioner’s land. Therefore, the writ petitioner was recognized as the absolute owner and is entitled to a patta.

4. The Writ Court, after considering the materials on record, allowed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondents, as appellants, have filed the present writ appeal.

5. The submissions of the learned Additional Advocate General are as follows:

5.1. The respondent/writ petitioner filed the writ petition seeking a direction to the fourth respondent to issue a patta in his favour for land in Survey No.695/Part, measuring 15 acres and 65 cents, located at Sirumalai Village, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District. A preliminary notification under Section 4 of the TAMIL NADU FOREST ACT , 1882, was issued by the Government for constituting the Sirumalai West Forest Block-I, which included the writ petitioner’s land. This notification was published in the Government Gazette on 31.08.1977.

5.2. Subsequently, the writ petitioner filed a claim petition in Claim No.14 of 1978 before the Forest Settlement Officer, Dindigul, seeking deletion of the said land from the forest notification.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top