The court affirmed that rights over land must be adjudicated in civil courts, not in writ proceedings under Article 226.

Heard.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer:

“Therefore, it is most respectfully prayed the Hon’ble court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representations (Annexure F1 to Annexure 11) dated 27.01.2023, 30.09.2025 etc. and to take appropriate action in accordance with law, for formation, restoration and protection of a public pathway providing access to Perumal Thangal Lake from Ayyanar Kulam, as indicated in the Vettukadu Village Map (No.136) and being the only available access to the said water body, and to ensure free and unobstructed public access thereto, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court and pass such other suitable orders, and thus rendered justice.”

3. The prayer, in effect, is to issue direction for creating a road/pathway. This essentially lies within the fiefdom of the revenue authorities.

4. At this juncture, learned State counsel would submit that the prayer, which is being made by the petitioner, cannot be granted, since the pathway is running through patta lands and no one can claim right over the same. As a matter of fact, at one point of time, there was a proposal to that effect. Earlier, the holders of patta approached this Court and an order was passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.14662 and 14667 of 2023 on 7.9.2023 [Kuppusamy and another v. The District Collector, Villupuram District and others].

5. The said writ petitions were dismissed by this Court, however, with certain observations and liberty was given to the patta holders. Paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the order passed in W.P.Nos.14662 and

14667 of 2023 read thus:

“4. When the petitioners have given a statement allowing the other persons to reach their agricultural lands through the pathway, this court is of the opinion that no relief as such sought for in the present writ petition can be granted. If at all the petitioners raise any objection in respect of the patta land or otherwise, they have to approach the competent civil court of law for the purpose of establishing their civil right.

5. Disputed issues of civil nature cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Tahsildar and the Revenue Divisional Officer conducted peace meeting and the petitioners themselves have given a statement that they have no objection with the usage of the pathway which is being used for several years by the Villagers to reach their respective agricultural lands for cultivation.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners state that the petitioners have raised repeated objections for the usage of pathways. However, the said statement cannot be relied upon, since the learned Additional Government Pleader produced the statements of the petitioners signed by them.

7. This being the facts established, there is no other reasons to consider the relief as such sought for in the present writ petitions. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

6. In that view of the matter, the prayer, as sought in the present writ petition, cannot be granted.

7. The writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.