Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 39975
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, J
AL – Ansaar Trust – Appellant
Versus
District Collector Madurai District – Respondent
W.P.(MD)Nos.16282 of 2016 | 18566 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M.Ajmalkhan, N.Anantha Padmanabhan, P.Krishnaveni
For the Respondents: D.Gandhiraj, K.Manisekaran, N.Anantha Padmanabhan, P.Krishnaveni, K.Muralisankar, K.K.Kannan, M.Ajmalkhan
Property title disputes involving allegations of encroachment and public road status cannot be resolved through writ jurisdiction if there is no documented vesting in the government; such complex questions of fact and title must be adjudicated by a competent civil court.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 - Section 9(2) and Section 14 - Survey of lands - Rectification of entries in Town Survey number - Validity of revenue orders transferring patta based on unilateral claims regarding scheme roads without evidence of vesting in government - Jurisdiction of District Revenue Officer to rectify town survey records - Competency of revenue authorities. (Paras 4.1, 10, 16, 19)
(B) Property Rights - Private title vs. Government claim - Absence of documentary evidence confirming the vesting of land in local authority - Necessity of civil suit for title determination. (Paras 15, 17, 20)
Facts of the case:
Two writ petitions involving conflicting claims over property T.S.No.16 in Madurai. The Trust claimed the existence of a 50-feet scheme road based on old layout approvals, while individual owners challenged the classification as a road, alleging that no such vesting ever occurred and the land remained private property. The District Revenue Officer ordered patta changes based on the premise of errors in town survey entries, which was challenged. The Corporation also denied intentions to perform drainage work on the disputed site.
Findings of Court:
The court found that no evidence existed to prove the vesting of the property in the local authority or the government. Revenue officials lacked the authority to determine title or rectify town survey records in the manner contested. The court nullified the impugned orders and directed the parties to establish title through a comprehensive civil suit.
Issues: Whether the subject property constitutes a public road due to scheme layout markings; whether the District Revenue Officer had the jurisdiction to rectify town survey numbers; and whether the disputed land vested in the Corporation.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of evidence of transfer or vesting of private land to the government, mere references in old document layouts to scheme roads do not create a public right of way, and revenue authorities lack the competence to adjudicate title disputes.
Result: Petitions allowed; impugned orders quashed; parties directed to move to Civil Court; maintenance of status quo restrained.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of conflicting claims regarding property title and encroachment status. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. parties argument and procedural status of layout and survey document existence. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. absence of proof of vesting of land in public authority. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. revenue authorities cannot adjudicate title; findings of title belong to civil court. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 23) |
W.P.(MD)No.16282 of 2016
AL – Ansaar Trust,
Rep. By its Secretary,
Karamath Nagar,
70 Feet Road,
New Ellis Nagar,
Madurai – 16. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
3.The Tahsildar,
Madurai West Taluk,
Madurai – 16.
4.The Commissioner,
Madurai Corporation,
Madurai.
5.N.Krishnan
6.The Deputy Director of Town and
Country Planning,
4, Hakkim Amalkhan Road,
Chinna Chokkikulam,
Madurai – 625 002.
7.The Deputy Director and
PA to District Collector (Land Survey),
District Land Survey Office,
Madurai – 625 020.
8.A.P.V.Nagalochani
9.The Director,
Town and Country Planning Department,
Chennai.
(R6 to R8 are impleaded vide Court order dated 22.02.2018 in W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3797 & 3832/2018)
(R9 is suo-motu impleaded vide Court order dated 28.08.2024 in W.P.(MD)Nos.16282/2016 & 18566/2022)
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order made in Ni.Mu.No.60129/2015/G5 dated 31.12.2015 passed by the 2nd respondent as well as the consequential order made in R.T.R.No.223/2016 TK/8A/121/1425 dated 08.02.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same.
W.P.(MD)No.18566 of 2022
N.Krishnan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Madurai Corporation,
Madurai.
2.The Secretary,
AL – Ansaar Trust,
Karamath Nagar, 70 Feet Road,
New Ellis Nagar, Madurai – 625 016
3.The Director,
Town and Country Planning Department,
Chennai. .... Respondent
(R9 is suo-motu impleaded vide Court order dated 28.08.2024 in W.P.(MD)Nos.16282/2016 & 18566/2022)
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from encroaching or carrying out any work whatsover nature and further to remove the illegal underground drainage from the property of the petitioner in T.S.No.16, Ward No.5, Block No.85, in New Ellis Nagar, Madurai – 625 016.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, Senior Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates (in W.P.16282/2016)
Mr.N.Anantha Padmanabhan, Senior Counsel for Ms.P.Krishnaveni (in W.P.18566/2022)
For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3, R6, R7 & R9
Mr.K.Manisekaran for R4
Mr.N.Anantha Padmanabhan, Senior Counsel for Ms.P.Krishnaveni for R5
Mr.K.Muralisankar for R8 (in W.P.16282/2016)
Mr.K.K.Kannan, Standing Counsel for R1
Mr.M.Ajmalkhan, Senior Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates for R2
Mr.D.Gandhiraj, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R3 (in W.P.18566/2022)
COMMON ORDER
W.P.(MD)No.16282 of 2016 has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order made in Ni.Mu.No.60129/2015/G5 dated 31.12.2015 passed by the 2nd respondent as well as the consequential order made in R.T.R.No.223/2016 TK/8A/121/1425 dated 08.02.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent and quash the same.
2. W.P.(MD)No.18566 of 2022 has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from encroaching or carrying out any work whatsover nature and further to remove the illegal underground drainage from the property of the petitioner in T.S.No.16, Ward No.5, Block No.85, in New Ellis Nagar, Madurai – 625 016.
3. Since the issues involved in both the Writ Petitions are one and the same, both the Writ Petitions are taken up together, heard and disposed of by way of this common order.
4. The brief facts leading to the filing of W.P.(MD)No.1
