C O M M O N O R D E R

(Made by R. SURESH KUMAR, J.)

Since these two review applications have arisen out of the common judgment dated 26.04.2018 passed in W.A.Nos.712 and 713 of 2018, they were heard together and disposed of by this common order.

2. The review petitioners were the appellants among the other appellants in the said two writ appeals. They approached the writ Court to call for the records of the 1^st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.338 Revenue (L-A1-2) Department dated 10.09.2009 and to quash the same and also for a direction to the official respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for grant of patta/assignment in their favour for the lands they are in occupation situated at Eraiyamangalam Village, Thiruchengodu Taluk, Namakkal District.

3. In fact, the said writ petitions filed by the present petitioners and others were dismissed by the writ Court, as against which, the intra-court appeals viz., W.A.Nos.712 and 713 of 2018 were filed.

4. The case projected by the petitioners/appellants and others was considered and the writ appeals were dismissed by a common order dated 26.04.2018, where the Division Bench has traced the history as to how the title had been perfected in favour of the respondents 6 and 7, as their father was the original owner of the properties in question, from whom, the properties were taken over under the Tamil Nadu Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, and therefore, when patta was sought by the father of the respondents 6 and 7 under the provisions of the abolition of zamindari and introduction of Ryotwari Act (Act 16 of 1948), the same was rejected by the revenue authorities. Subsequently, after the demise of the father of the respondents 6 and 7, the respondents 6 and 7 have filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in O.S.No.397 of 1977 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sankagiri at Salem District and the said suit was decreed in favour of the respondents 6 and 7 by a decree and judgment dated 25.07.1978, holding that the respondents 6 and 7 were the absolute owners of the properties in question and that the suo motu change of classification of poramboke lands without invoking the provisions under the Act, was not proper.

5. Pursuant to the decree passed by the civil Court, the Government has come forward to issue G.O.Ms.No.338 Revenue (L-A1-2) Department dated 10.09.2009, by which, patta had been granted in favour of the respondents 6 and 7. Aggrieved over the issuance of the said G.O. granting patta in favour of the respondents 6 and 7, the petitioners herein, along with others have filed writ petitions viz., W.P.Nos.27043 of 2009 and 2857 of 2010, which went unsuccessful.

6. We have heard the submissions of Mr.P.Vijendran, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioners. When we posed a question to him as to whether any assignment orders have been issued in favour of the petitioners herein, the learned counsel was not able to produce any assignment orders. If there has been no assignment order issued in favour of the petitioners herein and also the similarly placed persons, who jointly filed writ petitions, the basis on which they claimed title over the property, when was questioned, there has been no plausible reason or answer from the petitioner side.

7. On the other hand, insofar as the respondents 6 and 7 are concerned, they got a declaratory decree from the competent civil Court in the year 1978 itself, pursuant to which, the Government have come forward to issue G.O.Ms.No.338 cited supra, granting patta to the respondents 6 and 7 thereby their title have been perfected. It is further to be noted that in the meanwhile, these petitioners seems to have filed a suit in O.S.No.372 of 1983 for permanent injunction against the respondents 6 and 7, which was also dismissed.

8. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, it can be claimed by the petitioners either for issuance of patta or assignment or seeking any other right over the property and the title has be