Madras High Court
G.Anjali vs The Union Territory Of Puducherry on 11 August, 2022
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.08.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864, 18273 of 2018, 22101 of 2018
and
W.M.P.Nos.4363, 4364, 17407, 17408, 17595, 17596, 21596, 21597 of
2018
W.P.No.3570 of 2018
G.Anjali ..Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Union Territory of Puducherry,
Rep. By its Secretary,
Government of Pondicherry.
2.The Sub-Registrar,
Oulgaret, Puducherry.
3.The Deputy Collector (Revenue North),
Office of the Deputy Collector (Revenue North),
Puducherry. ..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
of the 3rd respondent in respect of order vide letter dated 30.11.2016 in
No.6532/DC(R)N/REV/C2/GLR/2016/2880 issued to the petitioner and
quash the same as illegal and direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to assign or
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
fix or give guideline value of petitioner's property having an extent of 3600
Sq.ft., or 6 Kuzhi 4 Veesam bearing Plot Nos.121, 122 and 123 56 at
Oulgaret Village, comprised in Re-Survey No.231/4 corelating to Cadastre
No.1120 BIS ½, 1120 BIS 2/2, 1119/15, 119/2/5Pt, 1119/3/5, 1119/4/5/3Pt,
1119BIS, 1119/4/5/1/3, within the Oulgaret SRO and Puducherry
Registration District.
For Petitioner : No Appearance
For Respondents : Mr.C.T.Ramesh
Additional Government Pleader
W.P.Nos.14727, 14728, 14863 & 14864 of 2018
I.Ravi ...Petitioner in W.P.No.14727 of 2018
G.Rajeshwari ...Petitioner in W.P.No.14728 of 2018
R.Gandhimathi ...Petitioner in W.P.No.14863 of 2018
V.Lakshmi ...Petitioner in W.P.No.14864 of 2018
Vs.
1.The District Collector cum
Additional Secretary (Revenue),
Kamaraj Salai, Pondicherry.
2.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Registration Department,
Government of Pondicherry.
3.S.Sudiramballe
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
4.P.Umadevi ...Respondents in all WPs
Common Prayer:- Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the
1st respondent to issue GLR value and the second respondent to register the
Sale Deed dated 06.04.2018 executed in favour of the petitioner by the 3rd
and 4th respondents in respect of the land comprised in cadastre No.1062/pt
corresponding to R.S.No.228/1 Da kchinamoorthy Nagar, Sokkanathampet
Village, Oulgaret Revenue Village within such time as fixed by this Hon'ble
Court.
For Petitioner in all WPs : Mr.U.Karunakaran
For Respondents in all WPs : Mr.C.T.Ramesh
Additional Government Pleader
W.P.No.18723 of 2018
T.Prabakaran ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector cum
Additional Secretary (Revenue),
Kamaraj Salai, Pondicherry.
2.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Registration Department,
Government of Pondicherry.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
3.S.Sundiramballe
4.P.Umadevi ...Respondents
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
relating to impugned letter bearing No.9265/DC/(R)N/LA/NOC/2014-15
dated 19.01.2015 on the file of the 1st respondent to issue NOC and value in
respect of the land of the petitioner situated at Plot No.6, comprised in
R.S.No.231/4Pt situated at Ulavarkari Commune, Puducherry.
For Petitioner : Mr.U.Karunakaran
For Respondents : Mr.C.T.Ramesh
Additional Government Pleader
W.P.No.22101 of 2019
S.Rajeswari ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector cum Revenue Secretary,
Department of Revenue and Disaster Management,
Saram, Puducherry.
2.The Deputy Collector-Revenue (North),
Department of Revenue and Disaster Management,
Saram, Puducherry.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
3.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Oulgaret Sub-Registrar,
Jawahar Nagar Main Road,
Jawahar Nagar, Puducherry. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to
consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2019 and to fix the
Guide Line Value of the petitioner's property comprised in Oulgaret
Revenue Village in R.S.No.231/4, Cadastre Nos.1120 Bis 1/2, 1120 Bis 2/2,
bearing Plot No.85 to an extent of 1200 Square Feet, to enable the petitioner
to convey or mortgage the property, within a time frame.
For Petitioner : No Appearance
For Respondents : Mr.C.T.Ramesh
Additional Government Pleader
COMMON ORDER
The prayer in all these writ petitions is for a mandamus directing
the 1st respondent to issue guideline register value for the properties
purchased by them under various sale deeds which were presented to the
Registrars of Assurances for Registration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
2. Since the Registrars refused to register the documents due to
absence of guideline value, the petitioners have come before this Court. It is
the case of the respondents that the lands that are purchased by the
petitioners are subject matter of proceedings under the Pondicherry Land
Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on land) Act, 1973. Since the proceedings are
pending and the actual surplus has not been declared, the land owners
cannot alienate the property. It is the further contention of the respondents
that since most of the land owners have sold their entire land holding
including the area that is declared as surplus and the area allowed to be
retained by them, it would become difficult for the Government to recover
the excess land in the hands of the purchasers if further alienations are
allowed.
3. Mr.U.Karunakaran, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, in some of the writ petitions, would submit that the land
purchased by them are within the retention portion and therefore the
contention of the respondents cannot be sustained. This question of
alienability of land which are subject matter of Land reform proceedings
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
under the Pondicherry Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on land) Act,
1973 has been subject matter of various decisions of this Court. In
W.P.Nos.12330 of 2007 and 36622 of 2006, this Court had taken note of
Section 22(2) of the Act and held that the Registering Authority cannot
refuse to register the documents on the ground of pendency of proceedings
under the Land Reforms Act.
4. The difference between the provisions of Pondicherry Land
Reforms Act and Tamil Nadu Land Reforms Act was considered by Hon'ble
Mr.Justice V.Ramasubramanian in W.P.No.32472 of 2006, wherein, it was
held that unlike the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act, the provisions of
Pondicherry Act did not nullify the sale by the owner of the land which is
subject matter of land reforms proceedings.
5. Section 22(2)(a) of the Pondicherry Act specifically validates
the sale transactions and enables the Government to recover the excess land
from and out of the land held by the transferor (land owner) and only in the
event of such recovery becoming impossible, liberty is given to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
Government to recover the land from the transferee. Section 22(2)(b) takes
care of another situation where land is sold to several persons and provides
that recovery will be made from each transferee in proportion of the land
transferred to them.
6. Therefore, the Authorities cannot refuse to register the sale on
the ground that the proceedings under the Land Reforms Act are pending,
when there is a specific provision which safeguards the interest of the
Government barring the land owner from exercising his right to sell the
property would be in violation of Article 300A which protects the right to
property.
7. The difference in language of the two provisions viz., Section
21 of the Tamil Nadu Act and Section 22 of the Pondicherry Act was also
considered by a Division Bench of this Court in S.Vaitheeswaran Vs.
Union of India dated 22.03.2016. The Division Bench in paragraph 13 of
the said judgment noted the difference between the two provisions and held
as follows:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
On the contrary, Section 22 of the Pondicherry Act (9
of 1974), operates on a totally different platform. Section 22
provides that any person, who is holding lands in excess of the
ceiling area applicable under Section 22 shall not, after the
commencement of the Act transfer by sale, gift or otherwise or
make any partition of any land held by him or any part thereof
until the excess land, which is to be acquired by the
Government under section 17, has been determined and taken
possession of by or on behalf of the Government. Section 22
(1) also provides that such person holding lands in excess
could transfer by way of sale, gift or otherwise, if a permission
in writing is given by the Authorised Officer. This is a
departure from Section 22 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Act. Section
22 (2) (a) provides the manner in which the Government should
take possession of the lands, if there is a transfer by way of
sale, gift or otherwise of any lands in contravention of the
provisions of Section 22 (1). The Government, at the first
instance, should take possession of the lands equal in area to
the lands to be acquired by the Government from the lands of
such person, meaning the owner of the lands, who is found to
be holding lands in excess of the ceiling area. It further
provides that where such recovery from the person is not
possible, then the Government may resort to recovery of
possession from the transferee. Therefore, while Section 22 (1)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
provides that there shall be no transfer by sale or gift or
otherwise of the lands, which has been determined and taken
possession by and on behalf of the Government, in certain
circumstances, transfer is permissible with the permission in
writing by the Authorised Officer. But if there is a transfer by
sale, gift or otherwise of the lands in contravention of the
provisions of sub-section (1) to Section 22 of the Pondicherry
Act, the Government is bound to follow the procedure as
contemplated under Section 22 (2) (a), i.e., to recover the lands
from the person concerned, namely, the 3rd respondent herein,
and where such recovery is not possible, then from the
transferee, i.e, the present appellants. Therefore, the
distinction between the Tamil Nadu Act and the Pondicherry
Act is writ large and these provisions work in different fields
altogether.
8. It is therefore clear that the refusal on the part of the
Registering Authority to register the documents on the ground of non
availability of guideline register values is unjust and improper.
9. Mr.C.T.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for the Government of Pondicherry would submit that in most of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
the cases the land owners/ assessees have sold their retained area also
thereby they also make it difficult for the Government to recover the surplus
land.
10. Under Section 22 it is open to the Government to proceed
against the transferees in case recovery is not possible. If any assessee/ land
owner had sold the entirety of his or her holding then it will be open to the
Government to take action against the transferees who have purchased later
or proceed under Section 22(2)(b) to recover proportionate land from each
of the transferees when there are several transferees. Therefore, the rights of
the Government to recover the surplus land is very well protected under
Section 22. The indirect restraint on alienation by not providing the
guideline value cannot be sustained.
11. Therefore, all these writ petitions will stand allowed. A
mandamus will issue to the respondents to furnish the guideline value and
register the sale deeds that are presented for registration. Such action shall
be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
the copy of the order. No costs. Consequently, the connected writ
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
11.08.2022
dsa
Index:No
Internet:Yes
Speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
To:-
1.The District Collector cum Revenue Secretary,
Department of Revenue and Disaster Management,
Saram, Puducherry.
2.The Deputy Collector-Revenue (North),
Department of Revenue and Disaster Management,
Saram, Puducherry.
3.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Oulgaret Sub-Registrar,
Jawahar Nagar Main Road,
Jawahar Nagar, Puducherry.
4.The District Collector cum
Additional Secretary (Revenue),
Kamaraj Salai, Pondicherry.
5.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Registration Department,
Government of Pondicherry.
6.The Secretary,
Union Territory of Puducherry,
Government of Pondicherry.
7.The Sub-Registrar,
Oulgaret, Puducherry.
8.The Deputy Collector (Revenue North),
Office of the Deputy Collector (Revenue North),
Puducherry.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863, 14864 of 2018
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
dsa
W.P.Nos.3570, 14727, 14728, 14863,
14864, 18273 of 2018, 22101 of 2019
and
W.M.P.Nos.4363, 4364, 17407, 17408,
17595, 17596, 21596, 21597 of 2018
11.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
