JUDGMENT :

ANITA SUMANTH, J.

1. These Writ Appeals have been filed by the State, the District Revenue Officer (DRO) and Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk challenging the common order passed by the Writ Court on 02.03.2017 in W.P.No.23739 of 2014, filed by Tata Communications Limited (in short 'TCL') and W.P.No.23740 of 2014, filed by Videsh Sandhar Nigam Employees' Co-operative Housing Society (in short 'Society').

2. The prayer in the Writ Petitions is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus challenging proceedings of the DRO dated 06.06.2011 and a consequential direction to the Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk to restore the entry in the revenue records reflecting that patta for the property at S.No.155/2 and 156 in Padiyanallur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District ('property'/'property in question'/'subject property') stood in the name of the writ petitioner/R1 before us.

3. The Writ Petitions came to be allowed on 02.03.2017 directing the respondents to make necessary alteration in the revenue records and to restore the 'original name' in the patta. The Writ Court also holds that the society members are entitled to include their names in the patta. As against the same, only the State has filed these appeals.

4. We have heard Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader for the State/appellant, Mr.C.Mohan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.A.Rexy Josephine Mary, learned counsel for TCL/R1, Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr.Ashwin Shanbhag and Ms.Sella Visalakshmi, learned counsel for Hemisphere Properties India Limited/R2 (in short 'Hemisphere'), successor in interest to TCL, impleaded on 08.03.2022 and Mr.Mukund, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr.Sam Jayaraj Houston, learned counsel for the petitioner in CMP No.8885 of 2024.

5. Having heard all learned counsel, we find that that there are several claims that are being advanced as against the subject land, and accordingly, we segregate the admitted sequence of dates and events into five different streams as follows:

Stream A

(i) On 01.01.1947, the Indian Radio and Telecommunication Company Limited, a private company operating India's external telecommunication was taken over by the Government of India (GOI) and vested thereafter as a Department in the GOI under the name and style of Overseas Communications Services (OCS).

(ii) On 29.03.1954, the Government of Madras had, vide Memorandum No.47800/C/52-14, sanctioned transfer of land ad measuring 85.94 acres in Padiyanallur Village to GOI for locating a Radio Telegraph and Radio Telephone receiving station.

(iii) The station was opened on 05.03.1960.

(iv) There are revenue records, such as descriptive memoir of No.8 Padiyanallur Village of Ponneri Taluk, Chengalpet District as on 14.05.1962 which reflect that the subject property was Central Government land.

(v) On 28.01.2008, there was a change of name of VSNL to TCL and on 30.10.2008, there was a consent letter issued by the Ministry of Communication and IT to the Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Tamil Nadu for issuance of patta in favour of TCL for the subject property.

(vi) Post communications dated 27.01.2009 and 02.07.2009 inter se the State Government Officials, patta was issued by the Revenue Department, Tiruvallur District in favour of TCL. Though learned Advocate General would, incidentally, state that the Tahsildar was not the proper authority to have issued the patta, the State does not dispute the right of TCL in respect of the subject property. We have dilated on this aspect of the matter in paragraphs 6 to 9 of this order. In brief we may state at this juncture that there is no resistance by the State to the grant of relief sought by TCL.

Stream B

(i) On 27.03.1986, the assets and liabilities of OCS were transferred to Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) that was, on 01.04.1986, converted into a fully owned GOI enterprise.

(ii) On 04.10.1995, VSNL petitioned the Collector,