Madras High Court
Rajathi vs The District Collector on 20 February, 2025
W.P.(MD) No.4525 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:20.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
W.P.(MD) No.4525 of 2025
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.3247 and 3248 of 2025
Rajathi ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The District Collector,
Office of the District Collector,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Tahsildhar,
Office of the Tahsildhar,
Thoothukudi.
3.The Revenue Inspector,
Pudukottai Revenue Division,
Pudukottai, Thoothukudi.
4.The Village Administrative Officer,
Kumaragiri @ Pudukottai Taluk,
Pudukottai, Thoothukudi. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the
impugned show casue notice dated “Null” issued by the third respondent herein
and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the second respondent
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.4525 of 2025
hereint to issue pata in favour of the petitioner on the strength of the Judgment
and Decree dated 18.06.2018 passed in O.S.No.24 of 2015 passed by the learned
Subordinate Court, Thoothukudi and the settlement deed dated 07.09.2018,
registered as Doc.No.2948/2018 in favour of the petitioner herein, relating tot he
properties described therein.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Shathurthi Raja
For Respondents : Mrs.K.Malathi
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for in the writ petition,
with the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is taken up
for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2.The petitioner challenges the impugned enquiry notice issued by the third
respondent calling for objections from the petitioner as to why the subject lands
should not be retained as burial ground for the benefit of Adi Dravidar
Community.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would invite my attention to the
Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.24 of 2015 dated 18.06.2018. The said suit has
been filed by the petitioner's mother, Xavier Mary, against the District Collector
and the Tahsildar, Tuticorin. The said suit has been decreed in favour of the
petitioner's mother. Based on the said judgment and decree, the petitioner now
claims absolute ownership of the subject lands and has sought for patta. However,
without considering the petitioner's application for issuance of patta, the third
respondent has now issued the show cause notice inviting objections from the
petitioner as if the subject property belongs to the Government and is classified as
'Arasu punjai tharisu lands'.
4.Heard the learned counsel on either side.
5.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official
respondents would invite my attention to the communication issued by the
District Revenue Officer, Tuticorin, which is the communicaiton emanating from
the office of the District Collector and informing that the appeal may be preferred
as against the judgement and decree in O.S.No.214 of 2015. Even the said
communication is as early as on 23.08.2022. Today also, the learned Additional
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Government Pleader is unable to show that any appeal has been preferred
challeing the judgment and decree in O.S.No.214 of 2015. The judgment and
decree is binding on the statutory respondents, especially when the District
Collector and the Tashildar were arrayed as defendants in the said suit. The
judgment and decree was passed way back in June 2018 and even in 2025,
admittedly, no appeal has been preferred by the statutory respondents.
6.In the light of the above, it is not open to the respondents to contend that
the lands continued to be held by the Government as “Punja tharisu lands” and do
not belong to the petitioner. Though it is only a show cause notice that is
challenged in the present writ petition, considering that there is a binding
judgement and decree against the statutory respondents, the show cause notice
inviting objections on the premise that the subject lands are still Government
lands, ignoring the judgment declaring the right title and entitlement of the
petitioner's mother as early as in 2018 is clearly non-est from the eye of law.
Consequently, the show cause notice is liable to be set aside.
7.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the show cause notice,
dated “Null” issued by the third respondent is quashed. The second respondent is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
direcrted to pass orders on the petitioner's appeal for issuance of patta, within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
20.02.2025
sji
NCC: Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
To
1.The District Collector,
Office of the District Collector,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Tahsildhar,
Office of the Tahsildhar,
Thoothukudi.
3.The Revenue Inspector,
Pudukottai Revenue Division,
Pudukottai, Thoothukudi.
4.The Village Administrative Officer,
Kumaragiri @ Pudukottai Taluk,
Pudukottai, Thoothukudi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.B.BALAJI, J.
sji
20.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
