Madras High Court
A.Ramakrishnan vs / on 11 December, 2023
W.P.No.11378 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.12.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P. No.11378 of 2021
and W.M.P.Nos.19927 of 2021
A.Ramakrishnan ... Petitioner
/vs/
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
2. The Secretary,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Revenue & Disaster Management Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
3. The Commissioner / Director,
Survey and Settlement Department,
'Survey House', Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
4. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Rep. by its Secretary,
TNPSC Road, Broadway,
Chennai – 600 003. ... Respondents
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.11378 of 2021
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a writ of certiorafied mandamus to call for the records in connection with
the order of punishment passed by the second respondent vide G.O.(1D)
No.359 Revenue (S.S.3(1)) Department dated 08.10.2013 and the order passed
in review petition vide G.O.(1D) No.269 Revenue (S.S3(1)) Department dated
18.06.2015 and order passed in review petition vide G.O.(1D) No.38 Revenue
& Disaster Management Department, Survey & Settlement wing, Survey and
Settlement 3(1) section dated 23.01.2020 and quash the same and
consequently direct the first and second respondents to notionally promote the
petitioner as Additional Director of Survey & Settlement and refix the seniority
above the petitioner's junior C.P.Radhakrishnan retired as Additional Director
of Survey & Settlement, with all monetary benefits and all attendant,
pensionary benefits and other flowing there from.
For Petitioner ... Mr.G.Sankaran
Senior Counsel
for Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman
For Respondents ... Mr.T.Chezhiyan
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order of punishment
passed by the second respondent vide order dated 08.10.2013, the order passed
in review petition dated 18.06.2015 and the order passed in review petition
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
dated 23.01.2019 and consequently direct the first and second respondents to
notionally promote the petitioner as Additional Director of Survey & Settlement
and refix the seniority with monetary benefits, attendant benefits and
pensionary benefits.
2.The petitioner was charged for the offence that he had reclassified the
Government Poromboke lands as Ryotwari patta lands and issued patta to a
private person without any authority. Disciplinary proceedings has been
initiated against the petitioner and he has been charged with stoppage of
increment with cumulative effect for four months. The petitioner challenged
above said punishment by way of filing a review and the same was rejected.
Earlier the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.5994 of 2014 by
challenging the order of punishment. In the said writ petition the petitioner was
given with a liberty to file a review petition before the first respondent. The
review petition filed and it was also rejected and the punishment imposed
against the petitioner was confirmed.
3. Mr.G.Sankaran, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
submitted that though the lands are Ryotwari lands and as held by the
judgment of this Court in W.A.No.694 of 2010 dated 08.04.2010, charges have
been wrongly framed against the petitioner and he was found fault for none of
his failure; the petitioner has to pass an order only in compliance of the earlier
orders of this Court dated 13.06.2008 made in W.P.No.13807 of 2008 and
order dated 22.04.2009 made in W.P.No.30052 of 2008; the petitioner has
passed the order based on the inspection report and that he had acted only in a
bona fide manner and that was overruled by the disciplinary authorities.
4. Mr.T.Chezhiyan, the learned Additional Government Pleader,
submitted that the petitioner has got nothing to do with reclassification or
issuance of patta which are exclusively within the jurisdiction of Jurisdictional
Tahsildar and the Revenue Officials; the petitioner being the Assistant Director
of Survey and Land Records had unnecessarily meddled with the issue and
made an order by usurping the powers of the other authorities.
5. The whole background for the action which resulted in punishment
was on the assumption that the lands are Government land and not Ryotwari
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
lands. But, the above assumption is contrary to the observation made in the
judgment in W.A.No.694 of 2010. For the sake of clarity, the relevant
paragraph of the said judgment is extracted hereunder:
“ .. 3. The appellant has filed a parallel writ petition in this Court, being
W.P.No.25257 of 2009, wherein also a similar prayer has been made. The appellant,
who is the petitioner in that writ petition, has therein relied upon a letter dated
28.08.2008 sent by the District Revenue Officer-cum-Public Information Officer to the
first respondent-Association, which states that Survey Nos.18 and 50 of the said village
belong to the Corporation of Chennai. The Corporation of Chennai has filed a counter
affidavit through its Commissioner and in paragraph 4 thereof, it is stated that both
these survey numbers are ryotwari patta lands. It is stated that those lands are not
handed over to the Corporation of Chennai.”
6. If the disciplinary authority has overlooked the above important fact
and proceeded to punish the petitioner without taking into consideration of the
essential and fundamental facts involved in the matter, no prejudice would have
caused to the petitioner. Since the disciplinary authorities did not consider the
essential facts about the classification of the land which resulted in the
disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner, I feel it is appropriate
for the second respondent to consider the same in the light of the judgment
passed in W.A.No.694 of 2010 dated 08.04.2010 and pass an order afresh
within a stipulated time.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed and the impugned order
passed by the second respondent vide G.O.(1D) No.359 Revenue (S.S.3(1))
Department dated 08.10.2013, the order passed in review petition vide
G.O.(1D) No.269 Revenue (S.S3(1)) Department dated 18.06.2015 and order
passed in review petition vide G.O.(1D) No.38 Revenue & Disaster
Management Department, Survey & Settlement wing, Survey and Settlement
3(1) section dated 23.01.2020 are hereby quashed and the second respondent
is directed to consider the order of punishment in the light of the judgment
passed in W.A.No.694 of 2010 dated 08.04.2010 and pass an order afresh
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.12.2023
Index: Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
bkn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To:
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
2. The Secretary,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Revenue & Disaster Management Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
3. The Commissioner / Director,
Survey and Settlement Department,
'Survey House', Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
4. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Rep. by its Secretary,
TNPSC Road, Broadway,
Chennai – 600 003.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.N.MANJULA ,J.
bkn
11.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
