Madras High Court
S.Gnanasigamani vs The Special Commissioner on 17 February, 2025
Author: N. Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.19271 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.19271 of 2009
and M.P.No.1 of 2009
and M.P.No.1 of 2014
S.Gnanasigamani .... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Special Commissioner
and Commissioner Urban Land Ceiling
and Urban Land Tax
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The Assistant Commissioner
for Urban Land Tax
Kundrathur at
Alandur
Chennai - 600 088. .... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Declaration declaring that the proceedings initiated
by the second respondent in his Na.Ka.No.5516/84-A dated 17.08.1989 is
abated in view of Section 4 of the Repeal Act, since the physical possession of
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
W.P.No.19271 of 2009
the land comprised in Survey No.511/2B Part to an extent of 20.4 cents out of
37 cents and in Survey No.511/2-A Part to an extent of 5.85 cents out of 10.75
cents in all totaling of 26.25 cents, the land in Survey No.511/1-B Part to an
extent of 47.5 cents and land in Survey No.511/1-B Part to an extent of 48.25
cents, land in Survey No.511/2A Part to an extent of 22.9 cents out of 42.5
cents and land in Survey No.511/2A part to an extent of 22.9 cents out of 42.5
cents in all totaling of 1.68 acres in Patta No.282, situated at No.74, Kunrathur
Village, Sriperambudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District is with the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr. A.Ramu
For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the
second respondent dated 17.08.1989 issued under Section 9(5) of the Tamil
Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 [hereinafter 'said Act'
for brevity] and to treat the proceedings as abated under Section 4 of the
Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Repeal Act, (Act 20 of 1999)
[for brevity 'Repeal Act'].
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
2. The case of the petitioner is that the subject property is an agricultural
land and it originally belonged to one Punniyakodi Pillai, who in turn had sold
the properties to Tajuddin on 08.09.1982, who is one of the partner under the
partnership firm known as "Mars Brick Works". The said Tajuddin released
his share to his co-partners who are five in number, and by subsequent sale,
the total extent of 1.68 acres of property was allotted to M/s.Salem Polloteine
Society, who had raised banana plantation in the said property, from whom,
the property came to the hands of the petitioner vide five registered sale deeds
dated 16.03.2007 on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Kundathur, and ever
since, he has been in continuous enjoyment of the said property.
3. It is brought to the notice of the Court that the proceedings of the
second respondent dated 27.01.1986 has issued under Sec.9(5) of the Act in
the name of erstwhile owner Punniyakodi Pillai declaring excess vacant land
of 20,500 sq.mtr., after entitlement of 1500 sq.mtr., in Sy.Nos.511/1, 511/2
and 521 measuring a total extent of 22,000 sq.mtr., This was challenged in an
appeal before the first respondent herein and that came to be allowed in part,
vide order dated 29.06.1987, dismissing the proceedings of the second
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
respondent. Even thereafter, though the subject property is now under the
ownership of the petitioner, the second respondent had passed the impugned
revised proceedings dated 17.08.1989, in the name of the erstwhile owner
Punniyakodi Pillai, declaring excess vacant land of 7,950 sq.mtr after the
entitlement of 1500 sq.mtr. in Survey Nos.511/1 and 511/2 measuring an total
extent of 9,450 sq.mtr. The said acquisition is challenged in the present
writ petition.
4. The petitioner would contend that though Act 24 of 1978 was repealed
by the State Act 20 of 1999, the proceedings of the second respondent in the
name of the erstwhile owner is abated, as the petitioner is now in physical
possession and enjoyment of the subject property.
5. The respondents have filed the counter affidavit. It is stated in the
counter affidavit that one Punniyakotti Pillai had filed returns under Section
7(1) of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 for the
lands held by him in R.S.Nos.511/1 & 511/2 . A notice under Section 7(2) of
the Act was issued on 16.08.1983 to Punniyakoti and he appeared in person on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
19.04.1984 and 13.09.1984. The Adangal extract from Fasli 1389 to 1394
showed that the lands were not continuously cultivated and sales made after
03.08.1976 were null and void as per Section 6 of the Act. Thereafter, notice
under Sec.9(4) and draft statement under Sec.9(1) was served on him on
08.07.1985 by registered post. Since no objection was received from
Punniyakoti, subsequent notices dated 27.09.1985 and 18.10.1985 were sent
to him through RPAD and in response to the same, he appeared before the
competent authority and furnished the statement on 13.09.1984. Admittedly,
an appeal was filed by the erstwhile land owner and the proceedings of the
second respondent originally issued was set aside vide by order dated
29.06.1987. Following which, several enquiry notices were issued to the
erstwhile owner, who responded to it and appeared before the Competent
Authority on 18.8.1988 and submitted his written statement requiring the
authority to treat his land measuring 3.10 acres in S.No.511/2 as agricultural
lands. Thereafter, the second respondent had passed the impugned
proceedings dated 17.09.1989 deleting the aforementioned 3.10 acres of land
and arrived at the total holding of 9,450 sq.mtrs., of which, 1,500 sq.mtr. was
allowed for family entitlement and determined the excess land as 7,950
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
sq.mtrs., Thereafter, final statement under Sec.10(1) of the Act was issued on
14.02.1990. Since the land owner refused to receive the same, it was served
by affixture through the VAO, Kundrathur. Finally, the excess lands came to
be vested with the Government under Sec.11(3) of the Act and the lands were
taken over by the Government on 24.07.1991. This acquisition was published
in the Gazette vide Gazette Notification dated 30.01.1991.
6. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents
would submit that since the lands were acquired by the Government as early as
1991 and that the petitioner had purchased the subject property only in the
year 2007, and that too when the subject property stands in the name of
'Government of Tamil Nadu, at the time of his purchase, the said sale is not
legally valid. This apart, though the Government have also made a platform to
those purchasers who have purchased the lands without the knowledge of the
lands being acquired by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.565 Revenue
Department, dated 26.09.2008, the petitioner also failed to avail the relief.
7. In the light of the above stands taken by the respondents, they have
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
sought for dismissal of this petition.
8. Heard Mr.A.Ramu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents.
9. Various issues were raised by the counsel for the petitioner
questioning the proceedings of the second respondent. It is not necessary for
this Court to go into all the issues since this Court finds that the possession
was not taken in line with Section 11(5) of the Act r/w. Rule 8 of 1978 Rules.
If possession has not been taken as mandated, the Repeal Act will
automatically come into play.
10. This Court had the advantage of going through the original files that
were submitted in the Court today. Even though the notice under Section
11(5) is available, there is absolutely no indication that this notice was served
on the owner of the property.
11. The land in question is a vacant site. Hence, the notice must first be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
sent by registered post to the owner/occupier, and inspite of sending such
notice, no objection having been received, the authorities can proceed further.
For resorting to affixture, it is a condition precedent that a notice must first be
sent through registered post to the owner of the property. If that step has not
been taken, mere affixture of notice on the vacant site, pales into
insignificance. Once the possession is not taken as mandated under Section
11(5) of the Act, it will not be taken as a valid taking over of the possession in
the eye of law. Hence, the moment the Repeal Act comes into force, the
proceeding itself abates. The law on this issue is too well settled by a catena
of judgments passed by this Court and the Apex Court.
9. In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to interfere
with the proceedings of the second respondent on the simple ground that the
possession was not validly taken by following the procedure under Section
11(5) r/w. Rule 8 of the Rules and therefore, the benefit of the Repeal Act
must enure in favour of the petitioner.
10. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. In the light of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
interfering with the proceedings of the second respondent, the revenue records
have to be mutated in the name of the petitioner by the concerned authority
within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.02.2025
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
Neutral citation : Yes/No
ds
To:
1.The Special Commissioner
and Commissioner Urban Land Ceiling
and Urban Land Tax
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The Assistant Commissioner
for Urban Land Tax
Kundrathur at
Alandur
Chennai - 600 088.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
N. ANAND VENKATESH., J
ds
17.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 02:04:49 pm )
