Madras High Court
C.Annadurai vs The District Collector on 20 June, 2023
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
C.Annadurai ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The District Collector,
Salem District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Mettur Taluk,
Salem District.
3.The Head Surveyor,
Mettur Taluk Office,
Salem District. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to
dispose of the application for survey and measurement of petitioner land and
measure the property in Survey No.81/2, Kannamoochi Village, in Mettur
Taluk, Salem District in an Application Challan No.20220511005060 dated
11.05.2022 and new application Challan No.20230512006979 dated
12.05.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramajayam
For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveenkumar
Government Advocate
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the 2nd and
3rd respondents to dispose of the application for survey and measurement of
petitioner land at Survey No.81/2, Kannamoochi Village, in Mettur Taluk,
Salem District in an Application Challan No.20220511005060 dated
11.05.2022 and new Application Challan No.20230512006979 dated
12.05.2023.
2. The issues raised in the present writ petition were adjudicated by
this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.37519 of 2016
[S.Sakkarai Vs. The Tahsildar, Dharmapuri Taluk, Dharmapuri District]
etc., and batch, and a judgment was delivered on 19.06.2023 and the
relevant paragraphs of the judgment are extracted hereunder:
“36. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure
unambiguously contemplates that “The Courts shall have
jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of
which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly
barred”.
37. Therefore, a special enactment has no relevance
with reference to a right of the parties to approach the
competent Civil Court of law to resolve all nature of civil
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
disputes including boundary dispute, survey dispute, title
dispute, ownership or otherwise. Therefore, neither the
parties nor the authorities need to create an impression that
in the event of boundary dispute, the parties have to
approach the authorities at the first instance. It is not
required that the aggrieved persons, in the event of boundary
dispute has to approach the authorities for fixing the
boundary, they are at liberty to approach the Civil Court of
law under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is
unambiguous in this regard.
38. Submitting an application for fixing boundary is an
option available to the aggrieved persons. Once an
application is filed, whether the application is entertainable
under the provisions of the Act is to be determined by the
authorities and only if it is falling within the ambit of the Act,
then alone the survey or fixing of boundary is to be
undertaken. Even in this case, the authorities are bound to
relegate the parties to the competent Civil Court of law under
Section 14 of the Act.
39. It is contended by the petitioner that the authorities
are making certain findings regarding the title, ownership in
their order, while rejecting the applications. Such findings
made by the authorities either in the patta proceedings or in
the proceedings under the Survey and Boundaries Act are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
restricted and to be understood only for the purpose of
arriving a conclusion under the provisions of the Act and the
said patta proceedings or the proceedings under the Survey
and Boundaries Act would not confer any title or be taken as
a conclusive decision, more specifically under Section 35 of
the Evidence Act.
40. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to
consider the representations / applications submitted by the
petitioners in the order of seniority and by following the
procedures as contemplated under the Governmental orders
and in consonance with the provisions of the Survey and
Boundaries Act, 1923 and pass appropriate orders on merits
and in accordance with law. Wherever the applications are
already disposed of and appeals provided under the Act has
been filed, then such appeals are to be decided on merits and
in consonance with the provisions of the Survey and
Boundaries Act.”
3. In view of the fact that the case of the petitioner is also similar to
that of the cases (cited supra), the case of the petitioner is also to be
considered on the same line. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed
of. No costs.
20.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
Index : Yes/ No
Speaking order : Yes /No
Sgl
To
1.The District Collector,
Salem District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Mettur Taluk,
Salem District.
3.The Head Surveyor,
Mettur Taluk Office,
Salem District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Sgl
W.P.No.18018 of 2023
20.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
