Madras High Court
Raandilyachozhansaminathan vs The Tahsildar on 26 May, 2022
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.05.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
and
W.M.P.No.12674 of 2022
RaandilyachozhanSaminathan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Tahsildar,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
3.District Revenue Officer,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
4.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious Endowments,
SambandaSannathi Street,
Sambandarkulam,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 003.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
5.The Principal Revenue Secretary,
Secretariat Complex,
Chennai – 600 009, Tamil Nadu.
6.The Land Administration Commissioner,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005,
Tamil Nadu.
7.The District Collector,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001. ...
Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ in nature of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the 6th respondent in R1/1957374/2022 dated 22.03.2022 and
quash the same and direct the 6th respondent to grant patta in favour of the
petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.Charles
For R1 to R3, R5 to R7 : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan
Additional Government Pleader
For R4 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan
Government Pleader (HR & CE)
2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
ORDER
The order dated 22.03.2022 issued by the 6 th respondent is under
challenge in the present writ petition.
2.The order impugned dated 22.03.2022 states that the petitioner has
to approach the competent civil Court in view of the Government Order
passed in G.O.Ms.No.409, Revenue SS 1(2) Department, dated 02.07.2008.
The said Government Order stipulates that the second revision to the Special
Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration against the orders
passed by the District Revenue Officer, has been withdrawn and the relevant
portion of the Government Order is as follows :
“2.For withdrawing the second revision powers on
transfer of Registry cases he has cited the judgment
pronounced by the Hon’ble High court, Chennai in
W.A.No.1342/94 and CMP No.15872/94 dated 26.10.1994, in
which he has pointed out that the Revenue forums have no
jurisdiction to decide either the right or title of land in patta
transfer cases and it is for the Civil Courts to decide such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
issues. As difficulties are experienced in dealing with the
Second Revision cases, the Special Commissioner and
Commissioner of Land Administration has pointed out that
numerous appeals pave the way for issues being dragged
endlessly and the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of
Land Administration having been over burdened with
multifarious issues relating to lands spread over the entire
state.
3.The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land
Administration has suggested draft amendment to the existing
R.S.O. para 31.8(A) by way of deletion of the following lines –
“A further revision to the Commissioner of Land
Administration can be made within 30 days from the
date of receipt of the order and the orders of the
Commissioner of Land Administration are final”
4.In the above circumstances, the Government
examined the proposal of the Special Commissioner and
Commissioner of Land Administration in detail, and decided
to accept Amendment to R.S.O.31.8(A) as mentioned in para 3
above. Accordingly, the Government direct the Special
Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration that
all ongoing enquiries may be carried on to the logical
conclusion and orders issued. The Special Commissioner and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
Commissioner of Land Administration should ensure that in
all cases where enquires are not commenced, they may be
returned back, with direction to approach Competent Court of
Law.”
3.In view of the Government Order, the powers conferred to the
Commissioner has been withdrawn based on the judgment of the High Court
in W.A.No.1342 of 1994, dated 26.10.1994. Accordingly, the aggrieved
persons are permitted to approach the competent civil Court of Law. The
impugned order in the present writ petition reveals that the petitioner has
also been granted liberty to redress his grievances by approaching the
competent civil Court in view of the fact that the Commissioner has no
powers to entertain any such representation. As of now, there is no infirmity
as such in respect of the order impugned passed. Accordingly, the petitioner
is at liberty to approach the competent civil Court of Law for redressal of his
grievances.
4.With this liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
26.05.2022
mkn/ab
Internet :Yes
Index : Yes
Speaking order
To
1.The Tahsildar,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
3.The District Revenue Officer,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
4.The Joint Commissioner,
Hindu Religious Endowments,
SambandaSannathi Street,
Sambandarkulam,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 003.
5.The Principal Revenue Secretary,
Secretariat Complex,
Chennai – 600 009, Tamil Nadu.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
6.The Land Administration Commissioner,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005,
Tamil Nadu.
7.The District Collector,
Mayiladuthurai Taluk,
Mayiladuthurai District,
Tamil Nadu – 609 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
mkn/ab
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13486 of 2022
26.05.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
