State revenue authorities are legally obligated to consider representations regarding the violation of conditions attached to land assignments (DKT Patta) and to initiate appropriate remedial action if such conditions are found breached, subject to due process of law.

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Leo John Britto ... Petitioner Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.Revenue Divisional Officer, Kodaikanal Division, Dindigul District. ... Respondent PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to pass final order as expeditiously as possible in the pending revision petition filed by the Petitioner in Na.Ka.No.0145 of 2026 as against the subject land in SF.No.129/5, Kodaikanal Village and Taluk, Dindigul District, within a time frame as stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramanathan For Respondent : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to pass final order, as expeditiously as possible, in the pending revision petition filed by the Petitioner in Na.Ka.No.0145 of 2026, as against the subject land in SF.No.129/5, Kodaikanal Village and Taluk, Dindigul District.

2. Originally, the land comprised in Survey Field No.129/5, measuring an extent of 2 acres and 35 cents, was originally assigned to his grandfather, Yagappan, under a DKT Patta dated 28.03.1980. The said property was assigned only for agriculture purpose alone which was assigned to landless poor. However, after the demise of the said beneficiary, the subject property was illegally converted into house plots and sold to several individuals by the petitioner's paternal aunty. Hence, the the petitioner submitted a representation before the respondents seeking cancellation of the DKT Patta standing in the name of Yagappan. However, vide order dated 19.09.2024, the respondent has stated that as far as the cancellation of sale deed was concerned, the petitioner ought to approach the competent Civil Court. As far as the cancellation of patta was concerned, the petitioner was directed to approach the Tahsildar. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed a revision application to the Revenue Divisional Officer. Since the same was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The contention of the petitioner is even though the Revenue Divisional Officer is not having the revisional authority, the reason cited by the respondents is totally against the settled proposition of law. If is further submitted that for cancellation of any deed, the party should approach the competent Civil Court, but in the present case, the petitioner is seeking to cancel the DKT patta. According to the petitioner, once the DKT patta is cancelled, the consequential sale deed will automatically become null and void. The further contention of the petitioner is that the DKT patta was granted only for agricultural purpose and if there is violation of condition, the same has to be cancelled. Without taking the said facts into consideration, the respondent has passed the impugned order.

Therefore, the petitioner is seeking to reconsider the issue.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is directing the respondent to reconsider the petitioner's claim after issuing notice to all the beneficiaries, in accordance with law. If there is any violation of the conditions of assignment, the respondent shall take appropriate action for cancellation of the DKT Patta in the manner known to law. The said exercise shall be considered within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.