W.P.No.6166 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.6166 of 2016
And
W.M.P.Nos.21858 and 5505 of 2016
Sunil Kumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by the Secretary,
Revenue Department,
Secretariat,
St.Fort George,
Chennai.
2.The Additional Chief Secretary/ Commissioner,
Land Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai.
3.The District Collector,
Kancheepuram,
Kancheepuram District.
4.The District Revenue Officer,
Kancheepuram,
Kancheepuram.
5.The Tahsildar,
Chengalpattu,
Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.6166 of 2016
Prayer:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in the
impugned proceeding passed by the second respondent in
Rc.No.F2/20347/2014 dated 27.01.2016, quash the same and
consequently direct the respondent to grant Patta to the petitioner on
payment of the sale consideration as determined by the respondents.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sridhar
for M/s.B.Rabu Manohar
For Respondents : Mr.S.Silambannan
Additional Advocate General
Assisted By
Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in the impugned proceedings passed by the second respondent in Rc.No.F2/20347/ 2014 dated 27.01.2016, quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to grant patta to the petitioner on payment of the sale consideration as determined by the respondents. 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016
2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's father entered into agreement of sale on 15.07.1995 with one Nagalakshmi to purchase 5 acres of punja lands in S.No.96/21, Alapakkam Village No.241, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District and due to non performance of the said agreement, the petitioner's father filed O.S.No.54 of 1997 before the learned Additional Sub – Judge, Chengalpattu and the said suit was decreed in his favour on 31.07.1998.
3.The further case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's father died on 05.07.1999. Since sale deed was not executed by the said Nagalakshmi, the petitioner filed E.P.No.100 of 2021 and even thereafter she did not execute the sale deed and hence, the Additional Subordinate Court executed sale deed on 27.08.2022. Thereafter, the petitioner made representation to the fifth respondent seeking issuance of patta, however, his request was rejected stating that the land was originally assigned to one Vijayaragam during the year 1970 and the assignment was cancelled during the year 1975 and thereafter, the said Vijayaragam has sold the land to the said Nagalakshmi during the year 1984. Since the assignment granted in 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016 favour of Vijayaragam was cancelled during the year 1975, the petitioner's request was rejected.
4.The further case of the petitioner is that thereafter the petitioner made representation to the respondents to assign the land purchased in pursuance to the Court decree and since there was no response, filed W.P.No.12475 of 2010 before this Court and this Court vide order dated 13.07.2010 directed the fourth respondent therein to pass order's on the petitioner's representation in the light of the Revenue Standing Order 15 (25) and pursuant to the order of this Court dated 13.07.2010, enquiry was conducted, however, the petitioner's request was rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed revision before the first respondent and the first respondent vide proceedings dated 21.07.2014 forwarded the revision to the second respondent and directed the second respondent to dispose of the revision.
5.The further case of the petitioner is that since no orders were passed on the revision, the petitioner filed W.P.No.7445 of 2015 before this Court and pursuant to the order of this Court dated 17.03.2015, 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016 made in the said writ petition, the impugned order came to be passed by the second respondent. Hence, this writ petition.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order was issued on the ground that the assignment granted in favour of Vijayaragam, petitioner's father's vendor was cancelled during the year 1975 and subsequently, the same has been classified as Government poromboke, which is not sustainable one. The learned counsel further submitted that this Court in a catena of judgments has held that once assignment is granted, that cannot be cancelled beyond the period of three years. In the present case, the land was assigned to one Vijayaragam during the year 1970 and the assignment was cancelled during the year 1975. Hence, the same itself is null and void.
7.In support of his contentions, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court reported in 2019 SCC OnLine Mad 28114 (District Collector and others Vs. Elango); the decision of this Court reported in MANU/TN/0995/2005 (N.Padmanathan Vs. The District Revenue 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016 Officer and others) and the decision of this Court made in the case of Seriya Pushpam rep. by her Power of Attorney M.Jayakumar Vs. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner for Land Administration, Chennai (W.P.No.11836 of 2010 dated 17.03.2021).
8.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.
9.The facts in the present case is not in dispute. Admittedly, the petitioner's father entered into agreement of sale on 15.07.1995 with one Nagalakshmi to purchase 5 acres of punja lands in S.No.96/21, Alapakkam Village No.241, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District and due to non performance of the said agreement, the petitioner's father filed O.S.No.54 of 1997 before the learned Additional Sub – Judge, Chengalpattu and the said suit was decreed in his favour on 31.07.1998. The petitioner's father died on 05.07.1999. Since sale deed was not executed by the said Nagalakshmi, the petitioner filed E.P.No.100 of 2021 and even thereafter she did not execute the sale deed and hence, the Additional Subordinate Court executed sale deed on 27.08.2022.
6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016
10.Thereafter, the petitioner made representation to the fifth respondent seeking issuance of patta, however, his request was rejected stating that the land was originally assigned to one Vijayaragam during the year 1970 and the assignment was cancelled during the year 1975 and thereafter, the said Vijayaragam has sold the land to the said Nagalakshmi during the year 1984. Since the assignment granted in favour of Vijayaragam was cancelled during the year 1975, the petitioner's request was rejected.
11.The cancellation of assignment was not challenged by the said Vijayaragam or by the subsequent purchasers. Hence, making application for issuance of patta is not sustainable one.
12.The decisions relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is not relevant to the facts in the present case since the issue involved in those decisions is cancellation of assignment, whereas, the issue involved in the present case is rejection of the petitioner's request for issuance of patta.
13.In view of all the above, this writ petition is dismissed. 7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016 However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to challenge the order of cancellation of assignment in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
15.09.2022 pri Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No To
1.The Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, St.Fort George, Chennai.
2.The Additional Chief Secretary/ Commissioner, Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai.
3.The District Collector, Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram District.
4.The District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram.
5.The Tahsildar, Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram District.
8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6166 of 2016 M.DHANDAPANI,J.
pri W.P.No.6166 of 2016 And W.M.P.Nos.21858 and 5505 of 2016 15.09.2022 9/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis