Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 36226
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J
L.Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Chengalpattu District – Respondent
Writ Petition | Na.Ka.No.39349/2019/A4 | W.P.No.21523 of 2022
For Petitioner(s): Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan
For Respondent(s): Mr.T.K.Saravanan, AGP
Payment of notional loss with interest obligates re-classification of Anathinam land to patta, overriding disposal rules in Revenue Standing Orders.
Headnote:The writ petition challenges an order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the rejection of re-classification of land from 'Anathinam Land' to 'Patta Land' after payment of notional loss arising from a toddy shop license default. The land was re-classified in 1975 due to government loss, but full payment with interest was made in 2012, supported by Excise Officer's recommendation. The court found the rejection improper as Revenue Standing Orders 45(4) inapplicable post-payment, directing restoration. The core issue was whether land re-classified as 'Anathinam Land' for toddy shop loss must follow disposal procedures under Revenue Standing Orders 45(4) despite full payment. The court reasoned that payment extinguishes the loss, negating disposal requirements, and prior Excise recommendation mandates re-classification to original patta status. The impugned order dated 09.06.2023 was quashed, with direction to re-classify and hand over the land as patta within eight weeks.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges rejection of land re-mutation post-payment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondent cites non-compliance with revenue orders. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. payment discharges loss; re-classification mandated over disposal rules. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. impugned order quashed; land restoration directed. (Para 7) |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY L.Kumar ..Petitioner(s)
Vs The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Chengalpattu District.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records of the impugned order of the respondent in Na. Ka.No.39349/2019/A4 dated 09.06.2023 and quash the same and thereby direct the respondent to restore the “bought-in-lands”, which was ‘brought-in’ for the notional loss to the Government and to maintain status quo ante on and from 30.04.2012 for all purpose and that the lands to be re-mutated to the original land owner namely, the legal heirs of the petitioner’s father in No.121, Mugaiyur Village Survey No. 235/4B to an extent of 1.36 acres of Mugaiyur Village, Cheyuur Taluk, Chengalpattu District as the petitioner’s father has paid the entire dues to the Government as early as on 30.04.2012 for all purpose.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan For Respondent(s) : Mr.T.K.Saravanan, AGP
ORDER
This writ petition is filed to call for the entire records of the impugned order of the respondent in Na.Ka.No.39349/2019/A4 dated 09.06.2023 and quash the same and thereby direct the respondent to restore the "bought-in-lands", which was 'brought-in' for the notional loss to the Government and to maintain status quo ante on and from 30.04.2012 for all purpose and that the lands to be re- mutated to the original land owner namely, the legal heirs of the petitioner’s father in No.121, Mugaiyur Village Survey No. 235/4B to an extent of 1.36 acres of Mugaiyur Village, Cheyuur Taluk, Chengalpattu District as the petitioner’s father has paid the entire dues to the Government as early as on
30.04.2012 for all purpose.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's father viz., R.Lakshmikandhan is the owner of the land comprised in S.No.235/4 to an extent of 1.26 acre situated in Mugaiyur Village, Chengalpattu Taluk. Thereafter, the said Lakshmikandhan offered his bid and succeeded in public auction for toddy shop situated in Endathur Village and the said shop sustained loss, which resulted in notional loss to the Government. Therefore, the RDO, Chengalpattu passed an order dated 27.02.1975, in which the notional loss sustained by the Government was recovered by changing the Patta in respect of the subject property as 'Anathinam Land'. However, the notional loss sustained by the Government was paid by the said Lakshmikandhan along with interest at the rate of 12%. Such being the case, the Divisional Excise Officer, Prohibition and Excise Department, Chengalpattu made a report to the respondent dated 30.05.2012 to re-assign the patta in favour of the petitioner's father. While so, petitioner made a representation dated 08.07.2022 before the respondent seeking to re-assign the patta in favour of the petitioner's father. However, the same was not considered. Hence, the petitioner has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.21523 of 2022 and this Court vide its order dated 23.08.2022 directed the respondents therein to dispose of the same. Pursuant to which, the respondent passed an order dated 09.06.2023 by rejecting the petitioner's claim. Challenging the same, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
3. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that since the petitioner’s father has not complied the 45(4) of the Revenue Standing Orders, they are not in a position to re-classify the "Anathinam Land" as a "Patta Land".
4. Heard th
