Madras High Court
A.Selvaraj vs The District Collector on 29 March, 2023
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.03.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P(MD).No.1911 of 2023
and WMP(MD)No.4239 of 2023
1. A.Selvaraj
2. Kalieswaran
3. N.Chithravelu
4. S.Murugesan
... Petitioners
Vs
1. The District Collector,
O/o. the District Collector,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
2. The District Revenue Officer,
O/o. the District Revenue Officer,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
O/o. the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
4. The Tahsildar,
O/o. the Tahsildar, Kalayarkovil Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
5. The Assistant Director of Survey,
O/o. the Tahsildar, Kalayarkovil Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
6. The Village Administrative Officer,
Kurundhani Variyanenthal Group,
Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District.
7. Shanmugam
8. Muthusamy
... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, seeking direction to consider
the petitioners representation, dated 20.01.2023 and forbearing the
respondents 2 to 6 from surveying and issuing revised patta in respect of the
survey nos. 167/5H, 167/5K, 167/5I and 167/5G, situated in Porupanenthal
Village, Kurundhani Variyanenthal Group, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai
District without initiating fresh proceeding as directed by this Court in
WP(MD)No. 2168 of 2010, dated 12.02.2019.
For Petitioners : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi
For R1 to R6 : Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian
Government Advocate
For R7 : Mr.K.Kannan
For R8 : Mr.N.Karthick Kanna
2/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
ORDER
The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Mandamus,
seeking consideration of petitioner's representation, dated 20.01.2023 and
seeking a negative relief to forbear the District Collector, Sivagangai District,
the District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District, the Revenue Divisional
Officer, Sivagangai District, the Tahsildar, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai
District, the Assistant Director of Survey, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai
District, the Village Administrative Officer, Kurundhani Variyanenthal Group,
Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District/respondents 2 to 6, from surveying
and issuing revised patta, in respect of the lands in S.Nos. 167/5H, 167/5K,
167/5I and 167/5G, at Porupanenthal Village, Kurundhani Variyanenthal
Group, Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District, without initiating fresh
proceeding as directed by this Court in WP(MD)No. 2168 of 2010, dated
12.02.2019.
2.In WP(MD)No.2168 of 2010, a learned Single Judge of this
Court by order, dated 12.02.2019 had quashed the proceeding issued by the
District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai, dated 16.10.2008, in Pa.Mu.Pi.
4.33667/08, by which, the District Revenue Officer had directed the Tahsildar,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
Sivagangai to survey the lands in S.No.167/5G, 167/5H, 167/5I, after
examining the sale deeds, from those who are in possession and examine the
schedule of lands in said sale deeds and thereafter, identifying the vaikal and
also comparing the same with the name of the pattadhar.
3.WP(MD)No.2168 of 2010 had been filed by the third writ
petitioner herein. The learned Single Judge has set aside the particular
direction of the District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai, dated 16.10.2008.
However, liberty was given to the first respondent to initiate fresh
proceedings, for revising the patta, which was earlier issued in favour of the
petitioner, in accordance with law and by giving sufficient opportunity to the
petitioner, including the right of personal hearing before passing any final
order.
4.It appears that with respect to the aforementioned lands, there
were also civil suits filed by the writ petitioners herein. A suit in O.S.No.133
of 2008 was filed by one Ariyamuthu, who is none other than the father of the
petitioner, against P.Shanmugam and N.Muthuchamy, who are the seventh and
eighth respondents herein, before the District Munsif Court, Sivagangai,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
seeking to declare that the suit property belongs to the plaintiff and to grant
permanent injunction by restraining the defendants from interfering with the
peaceful possession of the plaintiff in the suit property. After full trial, that
suit was dismissed with cost. Perusal of the lands involved in the said suit
reveal that the suit property was comprised in UDR Patta No.137 in S.No.
167/5H, 167/5K.
5.There was yet another suit in O.S.No.135 of 2008, filed by the
third and fourth petitioners herein N.Chitravelu and Murugesan, against four
defendants, of whom, the third and fourth defendants are the seventh and
eighth respondents herein. That suit had been filed seeking permanent
injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful
possession of the plaintiff in the first and second item of suit property. After
full trial, that suit was dismissed with a specific finding that the plaintiffs are
not entitled for any relief. The suit property involved in that suit was
comprised in UDR Patta No.655 in S.No.167/5G.
6.Thereafter, first appeals were filed by the writ petitioners in
A.S.No.57 of 2009 and A.S.No.90 of 2009. Both came up independently
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
before Sub Court, Sivagangai and by Judgment, dated 08.03.2012, both
appeal suits were dismissed.
7. The writ petitioners cannot claim that the survey should not be
conducted over the lands, since the Civil Court had rendered a definite
finding, the Judgments had attained its finality.
8.The eighth respondent has also filed a petition in WP(MD)No.
2128 of 2021. That writ petition was allowed with a direction to conduct
survey, with respect to lands in S.No.167/5G.
9.The examination of all the above facts would indicate the
following:
1. The writ petitioners had filed a writ petition in WP(MD)No.
2128 of 2010, to set aside the order of District Revenue
Officer.
2. In that writ petition, the order of District Revenue Officer
was set aside, granting liberty to the District Revenue
Officer to initiate fresh proceedings, by giving sufficient
opportunity.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
3. The writ petitioners, either by themselves or through other
individuals, acting under them had filed two suits seeking
declaration and injunction. Those suits were dismissed.
4. Consequently first appeals filed by the writ petitioners were
also dismissed.
5. The eighth respondent has also filed a writ petition in
WP(MD)No.21128 of 2021, seeking to conduct survey and
an order was issued to conduct survey.
10.Therefore, the net result is that survey must be conducted.
Now the issue is for which lands survey must be done. They are the lands in
S.Nos.167/5G, 167/5H, 167/5I.
11.Let me go back to the order of the District Revenue Officer,
Sivagangai, dated 16.10.2009. Though it had been set aside, it does not mean
that he has no right to conduct survey. It was only held that he had not
followed the procedure in accordance with law. The learned Single Judge had
given liberty to initiate fresh proceedings, after following due procedure. In
the order of the District Revenue Officer, he had directed survey of the lands
in Patta No.167/5G, 167/5H, 167/5I and to determine the encroachments in
the water channel in the said village. It is trite in law to point out that a water
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
channel must be cleared from all encroachments and made available for the
benefit of all the villagers and should not be for the exclusive usage of a
particular person.
12.In view of the above facts, a direction is given to the second
respondent to conduct a survey, after issuing notice to all parties concerned.
The said exercise should be completed within a period of twelve weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
13.Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed.
Consequently, the interim injunction already granted by this Court in
WMP(MD)No.1687 of 2023, is vacated and WMP(MD)No.4239 of 2023 is
allowed. No costs.
29.03.2023
NCS : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet: Yes/ No
PNM
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
To
1. The District Collector,
O/o. the District Collector,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
2. The District Revenue Officer,
O/o. the District Revenue Officer,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
O/o. the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
4. The Tahsildar,
O/o. the Tahsildar, Kalayarkovil Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
5. The Assistant Director of Survey,
O/o. the Tahsildar, Kalayarkovil Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
6. The Village Administrative Officer,
Kurundhani Variyanenthal Group,
Kalayarkovil Taluk, Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1911 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
PNM
ORDER IN
W.P(MD).No.1911 of 2023
and WMP(MD)No.4239 of 2023
29.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
