The Court emphasizes the necessity for administrative compliance with Civil Court decrees and fairness in the issuance of land rights.

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA W.P(MD)NO.1595 OF 2025 B.Ganesan : Petitioner .vs.

1.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

3.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Kalayar Koil Taluk, Sivagangai District. :Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue patta in respect of S.F.No.197/9, with an extent of 0.64.0 ares situated in Vannikudi Revenue Village, Kalayarkoil Taluk, Sivagangai District in the name of the Petitioner and consider the same on the basis of the Petitioner’s representation, dated 23.12.2024.

For Petitioner :Ms.S.Anitha Lakshmi For Respondents :Mr.A.Kannan Addl.Govt.Pleader

O R D E R

**********

The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue patta in respect of S.F.No.197/9, with an extent of 0.64.0 ares situated in Vannikudi Revenue Village, Kalayarkoil Taluk, Sivagangai District in the name of the Petitioner and consider the same on the basis of the Petitioner’s representation, dated 23.12.2024.

2.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the order cancelling the assignment, dated 20.11.2009 by the second respondent was challenged in O.S.No.190 of 2010. In the said suit, an exparte decree and judgment was passed in favour of the Petitioner. Though the decree was passed as early as in the year 2011, the respondents did not take any action to set aside the order and hence, the same attained finality.

3.The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is a senior citizen, aged about 74 years. He is made to run from pillar to post for grant of patta despite the fact that Civil Court decree was in his favour. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the Writ Petition deserved to be allowed.

4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents states that as on date no steps have been taken to set aside the exparte decree. The learned counsel further submits that the respondents came to know of the exparte decree only after the representation was submitted by the Petitioner on 23.12.2024 and therefore, steps could not be taken to set aside the exparte decree.

5.I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record. By consent of both Counsels, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

6.The Petitioner is a senior citizen, aged about 74 years and assignment patta for the subject land in S.No.197/9, to an extent of 0.64.0 ares, in Vannikudi Revenue Village, Kalayarkoil Taluk,Sivagangai District was issued to the Petitioner by the third respondent vide Assignment Patta No.10486/22 to an extent of 0.64.0. In pursuance of the assignment patta, the Petitioner was cultivating the land and due to his efforts, the Tharisu land was converted into cultivable land. The Tahsildar, Sivagangai Taluk also issued patta for the subject land in patta No.1296. In the ‘’A’’ Register, the Petitioner’s name was recorded. While the Petitioner was peacefully enjoying the subject land,the second respondent cancelled the patta on 20.11.209. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S.No.190/2010, on the file of District Munsif Court, Sivagangai and an exparte decree was passed in favour of the Petiioner in the said suit on 24.2.2011 declaring the cancellation of the assignment patta by the second respondent as null and void. The Petitioner made several requests to the respondent to restore the patta in his favour, but the respondents did not respond to the same.The Petitioner, being a poor agricultural farme