Madras High Court
P.Sonaiammal vs The Block Development Officer on 1 September, 2023
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 01.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
P.Sonaiammal ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Block Development Officer,
Sankarapuram Village Panchayat,
Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.
2.The President,
Sankarapuram Village Panchayat,
Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to
assess the petitioner's house for property tax situated in Old S.No.9/3, New
S.No.9/129B of Sekkalaikottai Village, Sankarapuram Panchayat and to issue
property tax receipts on receipt of the tax amount.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Anandkumar
For R-1 : Mr.C.Baskaran,
Government Advocate.
For R-2 : Mr.N.C.Ashok Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed for Mandamus, directing the respondents to
assess the petitioner's house for property tax situated in Old S.No.9/3, New
S.No.9/129B of Sekkalaikottai Village, Sankarapuram Panchayat and to issue
property tax receipts on receipt of the tax amount.
2. The petitioner has purchased the said property through registered sale
deed dated 17.12.2020. In order to put up dwelling house, the petitioner had
applied for building plan approval to the second respondent. The said
application was processed and approved by the respondents. Based on the
approval, the petitioner has put up construction and completed the same
without any deviation. The petitioner had applied for EB service connection
from the Electricity Department and the same was granted. Thereafter, the
petitioner approached the respondents for assessment of property tax. Since the
same was refused, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated
26.05.2023. Inspite of several attempts, the respondents did not assess the
property and was not ready to issue house tax receipts. Hence, the petitioner is
before this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
3. The second respondent has filed a counter stating that the petitioner is
claiming to have purchased the land from one A.Rajan through registered sale
deed dated 27.12.2020 and has applied for planning approval and the same was
granted. On 26.05.2023 the petitioner had approached for assessing the house
in order to levy property tax. But the petitioner has suppressed the following
material facts. After the receipt of the application for assessment, a show cause
notice dated 21.02.2022 was issued by the second respondent directing the
petitioner to explain regarding the compliant dated 28.01.2022 received from
the Principal, Alagappa Chettiar Government College of Engineering and
Technology, Karaikudi. In the complaint, the College has stated that they are
owners of the land in S.No.9/3 and the petitioner's sale deed dated 27.12.2020
was executed by creating forgery patta. The petitioner has not submitted any
reply to the said show cause notice. In the complaint submitted by the
Alagappa Chettiar Government College of Engineering and Technology,
Karaikudi, the following facts were submitted and the relevant portion is
extracted hereunder:
Dr.Alagappa Chettiar Educational Trust owned 244.39
acres of land including the land in S.No.9/3 and they
constructed an Engineering College in the same. On
22.12.1971 the Government of Tamil Nadu has taken over
the above college along with buildings and land including
the land in S.No.9/3. The College was renamed as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
Alagappa Chettiar Government College of Engineering and
Technology, Karaikudi. After taking over, the entire 244.39
acres of land have been classified as Government Land. As
college did not construct any compound wall, several
busybodies have started to encroach the college land.
Hence based on the complaint given by the College, the
District Registrar, Karaikudi issued an order dated
03.07.2015 directing the Sub-Registrar, Karaikudi not to
register any document relating to the property of College
owned by the Government of Tamil Nadu. Above
prohibitory order is being reflected in the EC. But even
after passing of the prohibitory order, the sub-registrar,
Karaikudi has registered the sale deed dated 27.12.2020.
The petitioner being aware of the above has obtained the
sale deed to usurp the Government property. Further the
College contended that the petitioner's vendor Rajan has
registered two sale deed including the sale deed dated
27.12.2020 by creating a patta bearing S.No.9/129B by
forgery. The Tahsildar, Karaikudi issued a proceeding
dated 20.12.2022 in O.Mu.Aa2/7757/2022 stating that they
did not make any sub-division as S.No.9/129B and the same
does not exist in revenue records.
Without submitting any reply to the said show cause notice, the petitioner
had filed this Writ Petition and deviating the issue. The averments in the
affidavit filed along with the Writ Petition is declined as false. Therefore, the
learned counsel appearing for the second respondent prayed to dismiss this Writ
Petition.
4. Heard Mr.J.Anandkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr.C.Baskaran, learned Government Advocate for the first respondent and
Mr.N.C.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the second respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents relied on the
proceedings issued by the District Registrar, Karaikudi dated 03.07.2015,
wherein it is stated that the Alagappa Chettiar Government College of
Engineering and Technology, Karaikudi has given a complaint that the land in
Survey No.9/2b, 9/1b2 and 9/3 belongs to the Government and hence the said
lands cannot be registered. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
refuted the said proceedings and submitted that subsequent proceedings was
issued by the same District Registrar in Na.Ka.No.324/A1/2022, dated
19.04.2022. The complaint of one S.M.K.Chokkalingam was taken on file and
elaborately the issue was discussed and has held that two persons are claiming
right over the said property. Therefore, the issue is civil in nature and the party
should approach the appropriate Civil Court to decide the issue.
6. On perusing these two proceedings, admittedly there are some disputes
whether the said land belongs to the Government or it belongs to the patta
holders. The same cannot be a reason for refusing to assess and impose
property tax. At the most, the second respondent can refer the matter to the
appropriate authority to take action against the erring person or erring officials.
Therefore, this Court directs the second respondent to assess the petitioner's
property and impose property tax. The said exercise shall be completed within
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The
other issues raised by the respondents are left open and it is for the second
respondent to bring into knowledge to the appropriate authority for taking
action. Until then, the second respondent cannot decline from imposing
property tax. However it is made clear that if any civil suit is filed in future,
then the assessment is subject to the judgment that would be passed in the suit.
7. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed in above terms.
There shall be no order as to costs
01.09.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Nsr
To
1.The Block Development Officer,
Sankarapuram Village Panchayat,
Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.
2.The President,
Sankarapuram Village Panchayat,
Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
S.SRIMATHY, J.
Nsr
W.P.(MD).No.18000 of 2023
01.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
