Advocates:
['M/S T ANTONY ARUL RAJ', '', 'S ANWAR SAMEEM', 'ADDL GOVT PLEADERW', '', 'FOR R & R OUNTER FILEDR', 'R DIED STEPS TAKEN', 'M/S VAIRAVASUNDARAM P']

W.P.(MD)No.11074 of 2009

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 05.04.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

W.P.(MD)No.11074 of 2009

P.Nachimuthu

... Petitioner

versus

1. The District Collector,

Dindigul District,

Dindigul.

2. The Tahsildar,

Vedasandur,

Dindigul District.

3. P.Poovayammal (died)

4. Palanisamy

5. Mariammal

... Respondents

(R4 and R5 are impleaded as legal heirs

of the deceased R3, vide order dt. 25.09.2019

in W.M.P.(MD)No.10748 of 2019)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,

to call for the records relating to the impugned allotment dated

20.09.2007 in No.19602/07/B3 issued by the second respondent in

favour of the third respondent and quash the same and consequently,

direct the second respondent to allot the said land comprised in

S.No.1340 measuring an extent of 72 cents in Vadugambadi Village,

Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District in favour of the petitioner

under the Special Scheme for handing over land to landless poor

agricultural family.

For Petitioner

: Mr.T.Antony Arul Raj

for Mr.S.Anwar Sameem

For R1 and R2

: Mr.A.Baskaran,

Additional Government Pleader

For R4 and R5

: Mr.P.Vairavasundaram

R3

: died

ORDER

This writ petition is filed as against the order of assessment

dated 20.09.2007. By the order impugned in this writ petition, the

Tahsildar, Vedasandur, assigned a land comprised in S.No.1340

1/4

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD)No.11074 of 2009

measuring an extent 0.290 ares in favour of one Poovamal, who is the

third respondent herein. Pending the writ petition, the third

respondent died and her legal heirs have been impleaded as

respondent Nos.4 and 5.

2. The case of the petitioner is that pursuant to the

announcement made by the Government under Rule 110, assigning the

lands for landless poor persons, G.O.Ms.No.555, Revenue Department,

dated 26.08.2006 was passed by mentioning the guidelines for

assigning the lands and the lands were assigned in the year 2007 to

the landless poor persons. As per the Scheme, the landless poor

persons alone are eligible for the assignment.

3. According to the petitioner, the husband of the third

respondent was having five acres of land and he died in the year

1996 leaving behind the third respondent and her legal heirs. As on

the date of assignment, i.e. on 29.09.2007, the petitioner was

having a land in Survey No.1340 measuring an extent of 72 cents,

but, the official respondents, without ascertaining the same, has

mechanically assigned the land in Survey No.1340 in favour of the

third respondent. Challenging the order of assignment, the present

writ petition has been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

land in Survey No.1340 is in occupation of the petitioner and he is

cultivating the land for several decades and 2C patta was also

issued by the official respondents in his favour. Without

ascertaining the same, the official respondents allotted the said

land in favour of the third respondent. Therefore, he prayed for

setting aside the order of assignment issued in favour of the third

respondent.

5. The learned counsel for the 4^th and 5^th respondents submits

that the lands of the third respondent's husband were allotted to

her son, namely, the 4^th respondent herein even before the assignment

and as on the date of assignment, the third respondent was not

having any land in her name. He also relied on the definition of

Family from the Act 30/2013 and submits that the family includes

widows, divorcees and women deserted by families shall be considered

separate families. He further submits that the 3^rd respondent was

living separately. He also referred to two different family cards,

one is issued in the name of the thi