IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.10.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No. 2 474 of 2025 a nd W.M.P.No s . 2 782 & 2783 of 2025

1. M.Sangeetha

2. A. Nalini ...Petitioners -Vs-

1. The District Revenue Officer, Cuddalore.

2. The Revenue Tahsildar, Panruti Taluk Office, Cuddalore District.

3. Mohanasundharam (R3 impleaded as per order of this Court dated 08.05.2025 in W.M.P.No.18772 of 2025 in W.P.No.2474 of 2025) ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to Na.Ka.V.2/3805/2013 dated 06.08.2013 passed by the first respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondents to issue patta in favour of petitioners’ in respect of the lands comprised in new S.No.164/1B of Marungur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Sreedhar For Ms.I.Ramya For Respondents For R1 & R2 : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.A.E.Chellaiah, Senior Counsel For Mr.A.Ahamed Rhilah

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent dated 06.08.2013, thereby registering patta in the name of the original assignee, in respect of the land comprised in survey No.164/1B situated at Marungur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District.

2. The property comprised in Old survey Nos.765/1A2 &

765/1B2 new survey No.164/1 situated at Marungur Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District, to an extent of 9.33 acres originally belongs to one K.Senjilakshmi. She purchased the said property by way of sale deed date 02.01.1976 registered vide document No.26/1976. The petitioners after verifying the revenue records, they had purchased the property of two acres out of 9.33 acres by the registered sale deed dated 23.08.2007 vide document Nos. 792 & 793 of 2007. Thereafter revenue records were also mutated in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners came to understand that the revenue records in respect of the subject property to an extent of 4.39 acres restored in the name of one Manickam and the land ad measuring 4.94 acres were classified as government proamboke.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that without any notice to the petitioners and without any hearing opportunity to the petitioners, the first respondent passed the order.

Hence, he prayed to allow this petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

5. On perusal of the records, it is revealed that the very same order also challenged by the petitioners’ vendor before this Court in W.P.No.25484 of 2013 and this Court by an order dated 02.01.2020 passed the following orders:-

“3. The reason for cancellation of the assignment was on account of violation of conditions of assignment because the lands were assigned to people belonging to scheduled caste community. According to the first respondent, the assignee has no right to transfer the property and any transfer, if effected, is a nullity.

4. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the jurisdiction of the first respondent to pass the impugned order stating that the Appropriate Authority to deal with the issues such as the issue, which has arisen in this writ petition, is the Revenue Divisional Officer. It is further contended that the Competent Authority to mutate the revenue records namely patta is the Tahsildar and that the first respondent has no jurisdiction to direct transfer of patta in favour of the said Mr.Manickam. It is also contended that she filed civil suit in O.S.No.132 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Panruti against private parties and prayed for a declaratory relief to declare the title of the petitioner over the property in question and to restrain the private parties from interfering with her possession. An ex parte decree was passed by the civil court on 20.8.20