Madras High Court
C.Kulandhaiyammal vs The District Collector on 29 October, 2024
Author: S.S.Sundar
Bench: S.S.Sundar
W.A.No.3409 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.A.No.3409 of 2023
C.Kulandhaiyammal .. Appellant
Vs.
1.The District Collector
State Highway 96, Opp. District Court
Palayapalayam, Erode 638 011
2.The Tahsildar
Kutchery Road, Erode Taluk
Erode 638 001
3.The Village Administrative Officer
22, Erode 'E' Village
Erode Taluk .. Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order
dated 08.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.26307 of 2023.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Raghavachari
For Respondents : Mr.R.Ramanlaal
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by Mr.A.Selvendran
Special Government Pleader
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.A.No.3409 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)
This appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated
08.09.2023, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant in W.P.No.26307
of 2023, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents
to consider her representation dated 28.06.2022 and to issue natham patta to the
land which is classified as grama natham in survey No.1855/4, admeasuring
7125 sq.ft. situated in Erode Taluk.
2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as
follows :
The appellant has submitted a representation to the respondents for grant
of patta in respect of the subject land classified as grama natham. The case of
the appellant is that she purchased the property along with a house by a
registered sale deed dated 18.09.1968 and she is residing in the said property.
Since the property has been classified as natham poramboke in the revenue
records, no patta was issued to the appellant either under the Natham Settlement
Scheme or on her representation. Hence, she filed W.P.No.26307 of 2023, after
making a representation for grant of patta. The said writ petition was dismissed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
by the learned Single Judge, suspecting the bona fides of the claim of the
petitioner by taking note of the submission of the learned Additional
Government Pleader to the effect that the property is situated within Erode
Corporation and that such urban lands cannot remain as grama natham. The
learned Single Judge further observed that the assignment of such land to an
extent of about 7125 sq.ft. cannot be granted and dismissed the writ petition as
if the entire property belongs to the Government. Aggrieved by this order of the
learned Single Judge, this writ appeal has been preferred.
3. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.
4. This Court has held in several cases that the property which is
classified as natham, does not vest with the Government. House sites in
revenue villages which are being used for residential purpose cannot be
classified as poramboke, unless the site is used as a communal land by the
villagers. When a large area classified as natham is vacant, such property
though classified as natham poramboke suggests that it is meant and used for
the community as such. The appellant has relied upon the sale deed dated
18.09.1968 in respect of a vacant land along with building and the same is not
in dispute. The fact that the appellant is in enjoyment of the property is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
admitted. In such circumstances, the appellant's representation ought to have
been considered fairly by the respondents in accordance with law.
5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that
several persons who are residing in the village and are neighbours to the
appellant, are given rough patta by the Special Tahsildar under Natham
Settlement Scheme.
6. This Court, in the absence of any record, is not inclined to make any
observation as to the eligibility of the appellant. The fact remains that the
appellant has made a representation. It is for the respondents to consider the
same as to the eligibility of the appellant for grant of patta, considering the facts
and after making a field inspection. When it is probable that the appellant is
entitled to patta in view of her enjoyment of the property for a long time i.e,
several decades, this Court is unable to sustain the order of the learned Single
Judge dismissing the writ petition. Therefore, this writ appeal stands allowed
and the order of the learned Single Judge is set aside. No costs.
7. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the
appellant in accordance with law and on merits, after holding an enquiry and if
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
necessary, make a spot inspection. Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court
that patta in respect of house site can be granted only by the Revenue Divisional
Officer and the District Revenue Officer is the appellate authority as per the
Circular dated 27.08.2024 issued by the Commissioner, Land Administration.
8. Even though the Revenue Divisional Officer is not made as a party, the
appellant is now permitted to make a fresh representation to the Revenue
Divisional Officer within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment. On receipt of such representation, the Revenue
Divisional Officer is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits and in
accordance with law, within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt of
such representation.
[S.S.S.R.,J.] [A.D.M.C., J.]
29.10.2024
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
gya
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
AND
A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
gya
To
1.The District Collector
State Highway 96, Opp. District Court
Palayapalayam, Erode 638 011
2.The Tahsildar
Kutchery Road, Erode Taluk
Erode 638 001
3.The Village Administrative Officer
22, Erode 'E' Village
Erode Taluk W.A.No.3409 of 2023
29.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
