Madras High Court
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 3 June, 2025
Author: Anita Sumanth
Bench: Anita Sumanth
2025:MHC:1243
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved On: 29.04.2025
Pronounced On : 03.06.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.Nos. 2322 & 2323 of 2023
And
C.M.P.Nos. 6043, 10053 of 2025, 26003, 26007 of 2024 & 19810 &
19814 of 2023
W.A.No. 2322 of 2023:
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam
Vedaranyam,
Rep. By its Trustee,
S.Chockalingam, IHO
Therku Kuthagai Katharipulam,
Vedaranyam Taluk. .. Appellant
vs
1.The Government of Tamil nadu
Rep. By its Principal Secretary,
Department of Revenue and
Disaster Management,
Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Commissioner,
Commissionerate of Revenue and Disaster,
1/40
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Management, Ezhilagam,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The District Collector
Nagapattinam.
4.The District Revenue Officer,
Nagapattinam.
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Nagapattinam.
6.The Tahsildar,
Vedaranyam.
7.O.S.Manian
(R7 impleaded vide order dated 08.01.2025
Made in C.M.P.Ns. 26001 & 26005/24
In W.A.Nos. 2323 & 2322/23 by SSSRJ & PDBJ)
8.V.Baskaran
(R8 impleaded vide order dated 08.04.2025
Made in CMP 29388/24 in WA2322/23) .. Respondents
W.A.No. 2323 of 2023:
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam
Vedaranyam,
Rep. By its Trustee,
S.Chockalingam, IHO
Therku Kuthagai Katharipulam,
Vedaranyam Taluk. .. Appellant
vs
1.The Government of Tamil nadu
Rep. By its Secretary,
2/40
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Department of Municipal Administration,
Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of Municipal Administration,
Urban Administrative Building,
Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar,
Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai – 600 028.
3.The District Collector
Nagapattinam.
4.The District Revenue Officer,
Nagapattinam.
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Nagapattinam.
6.The Tahsildar,
Vedaranyam.
7.The Commissioner
Municipality, Vedaranyam.
8.O.S.Manian
(R8 impleaded vide order dated 08.01.2025
Made in C.M.P.Ns. 26001 & 26005/24
In W.A.Nos. 2323 & 2322/23 by SSSRJ & PDBJ)
9.V.Baskaran
(R8 impleaded vide order dated 08.04.2025
Made in CMP 29388/24 in WA2322/23) .. Respondents
Prayer in W.A.No. 2322 of 2023: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters
Patent to set aside order dated 25.07.2023 made in W.P.No.5141 of
2023.
3/40
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Prayer in W.A.No. 2323 of 2023: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters
Patent to set aside order dated 25.07.2023 made in W.P.No.6782 of
2023.
For Appellants : Mr.R.Singaravelan
Senior Counsel
For Mr.P.Jagadeesan
(in both appeals)
For Respondents : Mr.J.Ravindran,
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by
Mr.A.Selvendran,
Special Government Pleader
For R1 to R6
Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel
For Mr.V.Kasinatha Bharathi for R7
Mr.S.Senthilnathan for R8
(in both appeals)
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Per :- Dr. ANITA SUMANTH.,J)
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam (appellant/KGK
Gurukulam/Gurukulam) was established in 1946 at Vedaranyam by
Sardar Vedarathinam, a Freedom Fighter and Gandhian. The object was
to provide education along with board and lodge to girls who were
economically unable to afford the same.
2. As on the date when the matter was closed for hearing, the KGK
Gurukulam manages the following institutions and facilities.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
1.Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam Elementary School.
2.Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam Girls Higher Secondary
School.
3.Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam Girls Destitute Children
Home.
4.Goshala (Shelter for cattle, aiding in the Gurukulam's Self-
sustenance Programs).
5.Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam B.Ed College for
Women.
6.Social Welfare Board aided Printing and Electronics
Training Schools for Women.
7.Annappornalayam Charity Kitchen that provides free food to
students and residents.
8.Lady staff quarters for women employees working with the
Gurukulam.
9.Playgrounds for the Girls school and college
10.Bathroom and toilet facilities with biogas plant for
adolescent girls (located within 200 Meters of the proposed
Government construction site).
11.Separate bathroom and toilet blocks specifically for the
women's B.Ed college
3. Two Writ Petitions were filed by the appellant, (i) W.P.No5141
of 2023, wherein the prayer was for a mandamus directing the Tahsildar,
Vedaranyam/R6 to conduct an enquiry as per the direction issued by the
Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Nagapattinam in R.C.2665/B3 dated
20.10.2021 in respect of the title to the land for which patta had been
granted by R6 in proceedings No.K.Dis.13337/87 B5 dated 13.06.1988
and (ii) W.P.No.6782 of 2023 seeking a certiorarified mandamus
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
challenging the display of a poster on 27.01.2023 /14.02.2023 on the
compound wall of the land in S.Nos.632-10, 633, 634 and 635-1 in
Maharajapuram Keezhpathi Village (in short ‘lands in question’) to the
effect that the aforesaid lands belonged to Vedaranyam Municipality.
4. In the latter Writ Petition, the appellant had sought a direction to
the respondents to adhere to, and follow the procedure for acquisition as
per Sections 5 to 8 and 11 of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (in short ‘2013 Act’) for identification and procurement of land for
public processes.
5. Both the Writ Petitions came to be dismissed on 25.07.2023, as
against which the present Writ Appeals have been filed. The array of
parties in the Writ Appeals are identical to that of the Writ Petitions,
except that O.S.Manian, s/o. Somu and V.Baskaran, s/o. Vaithiyanathan,
Joint Secretary, Parents-Teachers Association have been impleaded as
R7 and R8 in W.A.No.2322 of 2023 and R8 and R9 in W.A.No.2323 of
2023.
6. Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for
Mr.P.Jagadeesan, learned counsel on record for the appellant assails the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
process by which the respondents have sought to trespass into the
properties belonging to KGK Gurukulam, as, according to the appellant,
those properties have been acquired specifically for the purpose of
Gurukulam as early as in 1957 by way of Award bearing No.7 of 1957
dated 15.10.1957 issued by the Sub-Collector, Nagapattinam (Award).
7. He would submit that the process of acquisition culminating in
passing of an award in favour of the appellant was in line with the
procedure contemplated at the relevant point in time. The lands have
been assessed by the revenue authorities and due compensation had been
quantified which had also been paid by the appellant to the erstwhile
owners of the acquired lands.
8. Copies of all documents including the award have been placed
on file by the appellant. The appellant has been in continuous possession
and ownership of the properties since the date of award, i.e., in excess of
65 years as on date. The KGK Gurukulam has set up various institutions
therein and is in continuous management of those institutions. All those
institutions are Government Aided and hence the State cannot disavow
knowledge of these facts.
9. As the very functioning of the institutions managed by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Gurukulam has been with the support of the Government, it is too late in
the day for the State to take the stand that the appellant is encroaching on
the land upon which the institutions stand.
10. There are errors in the revenue records which had been pointed
out to the authorities in or around 1988 and by letter dated 13.06.1988,
the Tahsildar, Vedaranyam had also confirmed that the appellants are
both in ownership and possession of the lands by issuing patta in their
favour.
11. It was only in 2021 that a dispute had been raised by the State
in regard to the ownership of the lands and this had arisen on account of
the sudden move of R7 in W.A.No.2322 of 2023 and R8 in
W.A.No.2323 of 2023, who is a Member of the Legislative Assembly
(MLA) for that constituency who displayed an interest in the lands in
order to construct a bus stand.
12. For the first time, after more than 6 decades, the official
respondents, at the instance of the MLA took the stand that the appellant
is an encroacher on Government poramboke lands. Immediately, the
appellant had made a representation on 18.01.2021 staking its claim to
the lands, enclosing all documents and addressing the same to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Tahsildar, Vedaranyam as well as other authorities including Chief
Minister’s Grievance Cell.
13. By proceedings in Na.Ka.No.5339/2020/B4 dated 02.02.2021,
R6 had taken a stand adverse to the appellant confirming that the
appellant is an encroacher in respect of the land on which the bus stand
was proposed to be constructed and were pattadars in respect of other
lands. According to R6, the lands on which KGK Gurukulam institutions
stood pertain to Vedaranyam Maharajapuram Keezhpadi Village,
Tiruthuraipoondi Taluk, Thanjavur District and vested in the State as per
the Inam Abolition ‘A’ Register.
14. The revenue records also confirm the aforesaid position. On
05.02.2021, 07.07.2021 and 23.07.2021, the appellant reiterated its
claims setting out the entire history of nearly seven decades in respect of
their ownership, possession and management of the institutions on the
land. On 20.10.2021, a memorandum was also issued by the RDO,
Vedaranyam directing the Tahsildar, Vedaranyam to conduct enquiry.
15. On 18.05.2022, the Special Personal Assistant to Hon’ble
Minister for Revenue and Disaster Management forwarded the
representation of the appellant to the District Collector, Nagapattinam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
with the request for proper action to be taken thereupon.
16. While matters remained thus, the appellant had been shocked
to read in the Thina Thanthi (Edition dated 04.12.2022) that Rs.115
crores had been allotted for construction of new bus stands, one of which
would be in Vedaranyam on the lands belonging to the appellant herein.
Thus, they were constrained to file two Writ Petitions seeking the relief
as has been adumbrated above.
17. Learned Senior Counsel would submit with great passion that
there had been no two opinions as regards the ownership and possession
of the lands ad measuring close to 15 acres that had been acquired by the
appellant as early as in 1957 till such time the proposal for construction
of a new bus stand had come to be mooted in 2021.
18. The entire records relating to the award of the lands were
available with the appellant and these cannot be brushed away merely by
virtue of some entries in the revenue records. Clearly those entries were
incorrect in light of the documentation provided by the appellant which
have not been disproved by the respondents.
19. The directions of the RDO for conduct of a detailed enquiry
have also not been honoured by the respondents thus far leading to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
evident conclusion that the lands on which the bus stand is proposed to
be constructed belong to the appellant only.
20. The educational institutions are being run solely for the benefit
of female students. This is not been disputed and, in fact, those
institutions are being supported by aid from the State. The respondents
are thus fully cognizant of, and are, in fact, partners in the noble task
being carried out by the appellant herein. Hence, it does not stand to
reason that the Writ Court had dismissed the Writ Petitions merely based
on the revenue records that were produced before it.
21. The voluminous documentation produced by the appellant
even before the Writ Court has not been appreciated by the Writ Court
and the erroneous entries in the revenue records have no sanctity in the
place of the voluminous documentation produced. As a final submission,
learned Senior Counsel would point out that if at all the project for
construction of a bus stand must be proceeded with in public interest,
then the State must be directed to follow the proper process as set out
under the 2013 Act for acquisition after payment of due compensation.
22. Mr.J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General assisted
by Mr.V.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader and Mr.Alagu
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Gowtham, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State
vehemently contests the claim of the ownership of the lands by KGK
Gurukulam. According to them, while the appellant is in ownership of
other lands as pattadars, the bulk of the institutions stand on Government
poramboke land.
23. They really have no answer as far as the question of the
original acquisition and Award is concerned, as it is a matter of fact that
the institutions have been standing in their present location from 1957
onwards. Notwithstanding this, and curiously, the State maintains that
the appellant is an encroacher. The question that then arises is how the
State has partnered the encroachment, further extending aid to the
institutions regularly.
24. It is thus clear that the question of title to the land was never in
doubt and was never a matter of uncertainty till such time the project for
construction of bus stand had been mooted. Learned Additional
Advocate General has, at our instance, produced some documents under
compilation dated 26.02.2025. According to the respondents, those
documents (extracts of registers and official records) indicate that the
land upon which KGK Gurukulam stand, comprised an Inam estate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
(Maharajapuram Keezhpathi Village, No.93, Thiruthuraipoondi Taluk,
Thanjavur District).
25. The extract of the Block Survey Settlement Register as well as
the Gazette Notification establish that the Inam estate village vested in
the State upon the passing of the Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion
into Ryotwari) Act 26/1963, vide G.O.No.781, Revenue Department
dated 12.03.1965.
26. As far as the award is concerned, their case is that while the
passing of the award by the Sub-Collector is not disputed, the award
ought to have been ratified by the Board of Revenue, which has not been
done. Since the award had not been ratified by the Board of Revenue, it
ceases to be an enforceable award.
27. They would also not agree that consideration had been paid by
the appellant to the erstwhile owners. According to them, even assuming
that proper process had been followed culminating in the award itself,
such award would attain legal force only if it had been ratified by the
Board of Revenue which had not transpired.
28. Learned Additional Advocate General also argues that the Writ
Petitions are not maintainable, since the prayer in W.P.No.5141 of 2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
is in the nature of a declaration relating to title for land which cannot be
sought in a Writ petition. That apart, vide orders passed in 2021, the
claim of the appellant to those lands has been categorically rejected by
the Tahsildar and those orders have become final. Hence, the appellant
cannot seek to lay claim to title for land, disguising a plea for Declaration
as a Mandamus.
29. The respondents had been specifically directed to produce the
results of the enquiry ordered on 20.10.2021 by the RDO. Admittedly,
the directions of the RDO have not been complied with and no
documents are produced that indicate otherwise.
30. Learned Additional Advocate General would also submit that
the notice under Section 7 of the Act had been issued to the Appellant
but has not been challenged either by way of a statutory appeal or Writ
Petition. With this the entire proceedings have attained finality.
31. He draws attention to a letter from the Secretary of KGK
Gurukulam, whereunder the Secretary has acquiesced to the process of
take-over of their land, agreeing to handover the property to the State.
Thus, in light of that letter, the appellant has no locus to reiterate their
claim on the land.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
32. That apart, public interest must prevail over private interest
and the proposal for construction of the bus stand must continue. He
circulates photographs indicating that 60% of the construction was
almost complete and hence, there should be no interruption of the project
at this stage.
33. Likewise, Mr.Raghavachari, learned Senior Counsel appearing
for Mr.Mr.V.Kasinatha Bharathi, learned counsel for the MLA,
impleaded at the stage of Writ Appeal, sings the same tune. He would
submit that the present proposal had been necessitated on account of a
dire need for a bus stand at that point and public purpose would override
private demands.
34. He draws attention to the Gazette Notification as per which the
Inam estate of Maharajapuram Keezhpathi Village, comprising
Melvaram and Kudivaram vested in the State. Thus, the question of the
property having been acquired by the KGK Gurukulam does not arise.
According to him, even if there had an award as contended, it was of no
use, as the Board of Revenue has not ratified those proposals. In any
event, with the vesting of the land in the State vide G.O. dated
12.03.1965, the award has lapsed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
35. He draws attention to communication dated 01.02.2021,
wherein KGK Gurukulam makes reference to document dated
26.06.1971, which is a ‘claim settlement’, pointing out that such a
document has not been produced at all. They rely on the history of
Village No.131 (Vedaranyam Village) as set out in the Settlement
Register which contains entries to the effect that the lands upon which
KGK Gurukulam institutions stand, form part of the Settlement Register,
duly endorsed by the Inspector and Special Tahsildar of Land Settlement
Department and the Assistant Director of Land Survey Records
Department, on 20.07.2011.
36. He also draws attention to letter dated 04.01.1958 addressed to
the Manager of KGK Gurukulam from the office of the Sub-Collector,
Nagapattinam, where, referring to award dated 15.10.1957, he encloses
the conditions of alienation in triplicate, to be sent to the Collector for
onward transmission to the Board of Revenue, Madras, as the
consideration exceeds Rs.10,000/-.
37. According to the respondents, there has been no response/
compliance with the same and evidently, the award has not received
approval by the Board of Revenue, which is mandatory. In light of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
aforesaid, the appellant cannot rely upon the award as it has no force in
law.
38. We have heard all learned counsel and have perused the
documents placed before us by way of annexures to the pleadings as well
as the original records.
39. We first deal with the aspect of maintainability, being a
preliminary objection that goes to the root of the matter. According to
the State, the Writ Petitions are not maintainable as the prayer in one
touches on title to land and is a Declaration disguised as a mandamus.
Further, order dated 02.02.2021 has attained finality and hence cannot be
sought to be disturbed by way of Writ Petition.
40. We do not agree for the reason that the appellant is seen to
have promptly raised a dispute in regard to order dated 02.02.2021 by
way of several representations. Not only that, replies have been received
from the officials within the administration, giving the appellant the
impression that the representations are being looked into and enquired.
41. We particularly note communication dated 18.05.2022,
wherein the Special Personal Assistant to Hon’ble Minister for Revenue
and Disaster Management has written to the District Collector,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Nagapattinam drawing attention to the representations of the appellant
and requesting the District Collector to look into the representation in
light of the annexures filed. Letter dated 18.05.2022 reads as follows:
S.Gopalsamy, Fort St. George,
Special Personal Assistant to Chennai 600 009
Hon'ble Minister for Revenue and
Disaster Management
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date : 18.05.2022
To
District Collector,
Nagapattinam district,
Nagapattinam.
Beloved Sir, Vanakkam,
I request yourself to take proper action on the petition
which had been received along with the enclosure received
from the office of Hon'ble Minister for Revenue and Disaster
Management, and to inform the details of the action taken to
the petitioner.
Yours faithfully,
sd.XX(S.Gopalsamy)
Special Personal Assistant to
Hon'ble Minister for Revenue
and
Disaster Management.
Copy to:
Thiru A.Vedaratnam,
Managing Trustee,
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam,
Vedaranyam Circle,
Vedaranyam taluk 614 810
Nagapattinam district
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
42. Even prior thereto, the District Revenue Officer, Nagapattinam
has addressed a letter to Revenue Divisional Officer, Vedaranyam in
Na.Ka.17765/2021/Uoo.1 dated 19.11.2021, wherein, he has forwarded
the representation of the appellant to the latter asking him to not only
take proper action in respect of the claim of the appellant but to inform
the details of the enquiry to the Deputy Secretary, Revenue and Disaster
Management, Disposal Wing, LD – 3(1) Section as well to her office.
43. Letter dated 19.11.2021 is extracted below:
From To
Tmt. V.Shakila, Revenue Divisional Officer,
District Revenue Officer, Vedaranyam
Nagapattinam
Na.Ka. 17765/2021/Uoo.1 date : 19.11.2021
Sir,
Sub: Nagapattinam district – Vedaranyam taluk -
Maharajapuram Keezhpathi village, Kasturba
GandhiKanya Gurukulam – to correct the fact which
had been wrongly mentioned in land acquisition
proceedings – seeking to issue – petition is sent in
original for taking further action - regarding.
Ref: Letter from Deputy Secretary, Revenue and
Disaster Management Department in Disposal Wing,
LD-3(1) Section in Na.Ka. Dated 06.10.2021.
***
In the letter stated above in the reference cited, enclosed
therewith the petition, in which it had been stated that Thiru
A.Vedaratnam, Managing Trustee of Kasturba Gandhi Kanya
Gurukulam had stated that for the abovesaid Charitable Trust,
land acquisition had been taken in Award No.7/57 – dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
15.10.1957, land acquisition had been taken, that since no proper
entries have not been carried on the revenue records, in the
abovesaid place of 5 acres of land had been grabbed for the
purpose of construction of new bus stand and he prayed to
correct the same.
I request you to kindly take proper action in this regard
and to inform the details of the same to Deputy Secretary,
Revenue and Disaster Management, Disposal Wing, LD – 3(1)
Section as well to this office.
Encl: Original letter (sheets)
Yours faithfully,
sd.... (R.Banugoan)
for District Collector, Nagapattinam
//by order/
Head Clerk
44. The result of these enquiries are unknown. We also refer to
proceedings in Na.Ka.2665/2021/B3 dated 20.10.2021 drawing personal
attention of Revenue Divisional Officer, Vedaranyam to three petitions
from the Chief Minister’s Special Cell Secretariat, Chennai pertaining to
the same subject matter relating to allegations of land grabbing of the
appellant's lands and directing enquiry thereupon and to inform the result
of action taken in this regard by way of a report to the District Collector,
Nagapattinam, the office of the RDO and the appellant.
45. Letter dated 20.10.2021 is extracted below:
//personal attention//
Na.Ka.2665/2021/B3 Revenue Divisional Office,
Date: 20.10.2021 Vedaranyam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
MEMORANDUM
Sub: CM's Special Cell Petitions – Three (3) petitions –
Received from CM's Special Cell, Secretariat,
Chennai, 3 in number, received by Vedaranyam
Revenue Division – petitions sent – seeking to send
the report after enquiry – regarding.
Ref: Letter of District Collector, Nagapattinam in
Na.Ka.No.10587/2021/H2 dated 01.10.2021
received by this office on 06.10.2021
Three petitions from CM's Special Cell, Secretariat,
Chennai pertaining to the Vedaranyam Division,
Nagapattinam district, with the following particulars, have
been received to the Revenue Division of Vedaranyam
Division, for necessary action. The details of the said petitions
are as follows:
Sl. Name and address of the Claim of the petitioner
No. petitioner (Tvl.)
1. .... ....
2. A.Vedaratnam, Properties belonging to Women
Managing Trustee, Charitable Trust – in the abovesaid
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya properties, it is proposed to establish a
Gurukulam, Vedaranyam new bus stand at an extent of 5 acres of
Circle and Vedaranyam land – transfer of patta in the name of
taluk Women Charitable trust – regarding.
3. .... ....
The Tahsildar, Vedaranyam is directed to enquire into
the matter, and to inform the action taken in this regard, by
way of report, to District Collector, Nagapattinam (Sa.Pa.Ni)
to this office and petitioner.
Encl: Two (2) Original petitions 26-days.
sd.xx Revenue Divisional Officer,
Vedaranyam
//by order//
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
sd.xx Personal Assistant to
Revenue Divisional Officer.
46. There are other petitions also along similar lines which we do
not refer to in the interests of brevity. All the communications point to
action initiated by superiors officers within the State administration
calling for enquiry in respect of the appellant's claims.
47. It is a sad state of affairs that no action has been taken thus far,
despite categoric instructions in this regard by the superiors in the State
administration. To a specific query put to learned Additional Advocate
General as to what the stage of the enquiry is, or whether any enquiry has
at all been initiated, he confirms that no information is available on
record to indicate that any action has been taken on those directions.
48. Thus, for the State to now have adopt a stand that the Writ
Petitions are not maintainable is unacceptable as the appellant is seen to
have been diligent in regard to seeking action as against the adverse
conclusions in order dated 02.02.2021. That apart, all documents relied
upon by the Appellant and Respondents are admitted and part of the
record.
49. Thus, and in the absence of a factual dispute in this regard,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
there is no bar in this Court adjudicating the prayer sought. We thus
conclude that the Writ Petitions are maintainable and reject this
preliminary submission.
50. We now set out the schedule of the properties in order to
obtain clarity on the lands in question. According to the appellants, the
lands awarded to it under award dated 15.10.1957 are as follows:
t/vz; g[y vz; tifghL gug;g[ epy chpikahsh;
bcwf;nlh;!;
1 632-10 rh;ff; hh; 1/65/0 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
2 633 rh;ff; hh; 1/13/50 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
3 634 rh;ff; hh; 2/65/0 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
4 635-1 rh;ff; hh; 0/63/5 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
5 637-3 rh;ff; hh; 01/78/0 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
6 638-2 rh;ff; hh; 01/20/0 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
7 639 rh;ff; hh; 01/81/50 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
8 640 rh;ff; hh; 02/55/0 murpdh; Mjhu
g[wk;nghf;F Mrphpah; gapw;rp gs;sp
51. As per order dated 02.02.2021, the following Survey Numbers
house the Government Aided Teacher Training Schools:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Sl Survey No Classification Extent Owner of the Land
No Hectares
1 632/10 Government 1.65.0 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
2 633 Government 1.13.50 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
3 634 Government 2.65.0 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
4 635/1 Government 0.63.5 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
5 637/3 Government 01.78.0 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
6 638/2 Government 01.20.0 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
7 639 Government 01.81.50 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
8 640 Government 02.55.0 Government aided
Poramboke Teacher Training School
52. The above schools are being run and managed by KGK
Gurukulam and the above Survey Numbers form part of the lands
transferred under award dated 15.10.1957. Under order dated
02.02.2021, the appellants have been granted patta for 6.06.00 hectares,
i.e., 14 acres 96 cents as follows:
Sl Survey No Classification Extent Hectares Owner of the Land
No
1 612/11 Ryot Dry lands 0.05.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
2 612/12 Ryot Dry lands 0.14.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Sl Survey No Classification Extent Hectares Owner of the Land
No
3 612/13 Ryot Manavari 0.03.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
4 612/2 Ryot Manavari 0.28.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
5 612/3 Ryot Dry lands 0.06.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
6 612/4 Ryot Dry lands 0.11.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
7 612/5 Ryot Manavari 0.33.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
8 612/6 Ryot Manavari 0.53.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
9 612/7 Ryot Dry lands 0.31.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
10 635/2 Ryot Dry lands 0.43.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
11 635/3 Ryot Dry lands 0.46.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
12 635/4 Ryot Dry lands 0.52.0 125, Kanya Gurukulam
13 635/5 Ryot Dry lands 0.13.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
14 635/6 Ryot Dry lands 0.15.0 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
15 635/7 Ryot Dry lands 0.19.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
16 636/1 Ryot Dry lands 0.45.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
17 636/2 Ryot Manavari 1.11.50 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
18 637/1 Ryot Dry lands 0.27.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
19 637/2 Ryot Dry lands 0.47.5 13, K.G.K. Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Sl Survey No Classification Extent Hectares Owner of the Land
No
Total 06.06.00
Hectares (14
Acres 96 cents)
53. We directed the authorities to undertake a proper inspection of
the lands of KGK Gurukulam in the presence of the appellants and
circulate a map with all survey numbers including the lands acquired
under award dated 15.10.1957 and those held by the appellant as
pattadars. The map is annexed with this order as Annexure -A.
54. A perusal of the enclosed map would indicate that the bulk of
the institutions of KGK Gurukulam are spread over the lands acquired by
it under award dated 15.10.97, as well as purchased by it at various
points in time. All the documents placed on record by the appellant in
relation to the passing of the award are per se admitted.
55. The case of the respondents is that the documents produced
would not suffice to establish the claim of the appellant as there are
entries in the revenue records that run contra to such documents as also
that the award documents have not culminated in a ratification by the
Board of Revenue in order to attain sanctity in the eyes of law. Since
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
this issue is fundamental to decide on the claim of the document in
relation to their ownership and possession of the lands, we deal with this
issue first.
56. The complete award has been placed before us and we annex
the same with this order as Annexure -B. The title to the award is ‘Name
and Description of Property Acquired’, the name and description of the
officer who made the award is ‘Sri.S.Guhan, I.P.S., Sub-Collector and
Land Acquisition Officer, Nagapattinam’. The assumption of
jurisdiction of office by this officer and the exercise of power by him in
passing the award is not in dispute.
57. The award is dated 15.10.1957 – Award No.7 of 1957, the
names of the Sub-District and villages in column 3 are ‘Vedaranyam Sub
District (Inams) Maharajapuram Kilpathi’. The survey numbers, extent,
classification and other details of the land are set out in the columns
thereafter.
58. Page 3 of the award contains the phrases ‘entire interest’ and
‘to the Managing Trustee Kasthurba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam,
Maharajapuram at Vedaranyam’. It also states ‘for post basic school’.
Pages 4, 5 (wrongly numbered as 5 and 4) and 6 in the original award
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
continue with demarcating the extent of the property, names of the
owners of the Melvaram and Kudivaram and the consideration payable to
each of them. The tabulation concludes with page 7 where the total
number of land owners ends with S.No.22 and the total consideration
computed is Rs.14,472.52. That page is signed by an official ‘for sub-
collector’.
59. The first school was started under communication bearing
R.C.No.99.272 D/57 dated 10.03.1958 issued by the Inspectress of Girls
Schools, Tanjore Circle, Tanjore, submitted to the Director of Public
Instructions, Madras with reference to Roc.No.196 M 2/55 dated 31.8.57
for setting up Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam Post Basic School,
Vedaranyam and submitting all the documents given by the
Correspondent of K.G.K.G. Post Basic School, Vedaranyam.
60. The list of schools that had been commenced over the years has
already been set out in one of the earlier paragraphs. That apart, various
communications and Government Orders have been placed on record by
the appellant to indicate action having been taken by the authorities
between 1954 and 1959 based on award dated 15.10.1957 and
requisitions made by KGK Gurukulam for setting up of various schools.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
61. Those letters are as follows:
S.No. Date Description of Documents
01. 5.6.1954 G.O.Ms.774 Education dated
05.06.1954 of the Government of
Tamil Nadu, Health, Education
and Local Administration
Department, according sanction
for opening Post Basic IX course
at two places in Tamil Nadu, one
at Gandhiniketan Basic School at
Kallupatti and the other at the
Petitioner-Gurukulam from the
year 1953-54
02. 31.03.1959 Letter No.39783/55 dated
31.03.1956 of the District
Collector, Thanjavur addressed to
the Secretary, Commissioner of
Land Revenue and Development,
Board of Revenue, Chennai about
funds for acquisition.
03. 22.03.1957 G.O.Ms.No.507 Education dated
22.03.1957 of the Health,
Education and Local
Administration Department of the
Government of Tamil Nadu
specifying that the District
Collector of Thanjavur was “to
issue order placing the lands at
the disposal of the Post Basic
School, Vedaranyam” with copy
to the Petitioner Gurukulam.
04. 24.10.1957 Letter of the Sub-Collector,
Nagapattinam, addressed to the
Collector, Thanjavur bearing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
S.No. Date Description of Documents
No.R.C.9354-57K dated
24.10.1957 forwarding copies of
the Award 7-57 dated 15.10.1957
together with Award Proceedings
and “A” statement.
05. 21.12.1957 Letter of the Petitioner
Gurukulam addressed to the
Director of Public Instruction,
Madras.
06. 08.03.1958 Award No.7 of 1957 dated
15.10.1957 registered by the Sub-
Collector and Land Acquisition
Officer in the office of the Sub-
Registrar, Vedaranyam on
08.03.1958, as Document No.776
of 1958.
62. As far as the compensation to the erstwhile owners is
concerned, there is a letter dated 21.12.1957, wherein the appellant states
that they have remitted compensation in excess of what was to be paid
and seeking a reimbursement of a small amount. This, in our view, would
establish that compensation has, in fact, been paid by the appellant to
Melvaram/Kudivaram possessors of the lands in question. It is thus
futile for the State to raise a dispute in regard to these aspects at this
distance of time.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
63. As far as patta is concerned, there appears to have been some
discussions in relation to the issuance of patta in or around 1988 and by
communication dated 13.06.1988, the Tahsildar, Vedaranyam has stated
that orders are issued for transfer of patta in favour of the appellant vide
the following communication:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE TAHSILDAR, VEDARANYAM
Present: Thiru R.Seshadri
M M No.13337/87 B5 dated 13.06.88
Sub: Patta registration – Vedharanyam Taluk –
131/4 – Maharajapuram Keezhpadi Village – Left
out places – Patta Registered – Orders issued.
Ref: 1.Petition from Thiru V.Appakutty,
Managing Trustee, Kasturba Gandhi Kanya
Gurukulam dated 8.4.87
2. Other connected files.
***
ORDER:
It is brought to the notice through enquiries that Survey
numbers 632/10, 633, 634, 635/1, Maharajapuram Keezhpadhi
Village, Vedharanyam Taluk have been wrongly transferred
under the Land ownership Development Scheme. Hence orders
are issued for the transfer of patta as follows:
S.Nos Extent
632/10 1.65.0
633. 1.13.5
634. 2.65.0
635/1. 0.63.5
Total 6.07.0
Orders are issued for the transfer of patta for the four
items in Patta No.3 in the name of Kasturba Gandhi Kanya
Gurukulam.
Tahsildar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Vedharanyam
To
Managing Trustee,
Kasturba Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam
Vedharanyam
Copy:
Village Administrative Officer/Vedharanyam Thopputhurai to
make transfers in the Village Accounts
Copy:
Taluk Draughtsman/edharanyam
To make transfers in the Taluk 10.2 accounts
64. At a distance of 65 years, it is neither practical nor feasible for
us to call for the documents in relation to the exact demarcation of the
lands or patta in connection therewith. Such an exercise is necessary
only if the primary documents on the basis of which the appellant stake
their claim, are disputed.
65. Hence, we do not believe that such exercise is called for at this
juncture of time. The award produces establishes the survey numbers of
the lands handed over to the Gurukulam, the compensation paid and the
beneficiary. The passing of the award has never been questioned by the
State and their attempt to do so now is based only on the Settlement
Register and the fact that the award has not been ratified by the Board of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Revenue.
66. The Board of Revenue was in existence till 1980 when it was
abolished. However, the Gurukulam has been in uninterrupted possession
and management of the lands in question from date of Award till date
and it has also acquired by purchase an equal extent of land in the
vicinity.
67. There has been no whisper of objection at any point of time in
regard to these facts and moreover the Government has been
participating in the management of the schools consistently. Hence the
non-ratification by the Board of Revenue has not been a matter of
concern to the State till now and we see no merit in the State raising the
issue now, after the elapse of more than 6 decades.
68. Hence, our answer to this issue is in favour of the appellant,
and we reiterate the reasons as follows. Firstly, the complete copy of the
award has been produced before us and we have minutely examined the
same, despite the fact that the respondents have not really disputed that
award. We note that the lands in question comprise Inam settlements and
include both Melvaram and Kudivaram.
69. The Melvaram and Kudivaram right holders have been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
identified by name and the amount of compensation payable to each have
been set out, amounting in all to a sum of Rs.14,524.55. Communication
dated 21.12.1957 refers to the fact that such consideration has been
deposited by the appellant by way of distribution among Melvaram and
Kudivaram right holders.
70. In fact, the consideration is stated to have been paid in excess
and reimbursement has been sought. We are unaware as to whether the
refund was given. The Award details all the specifics of the lands
including the extent and the classification. It contains a clear stipulation
that the ‘entire interest’ in the land has been transferred. It also contains
a stipulation that the lands covered in those orders were acquired for
KGK Gurukulam for setting up of educational institutions.
71. Secondly, the parties have not rested content merely with the
passing of the Award but the official respondents are seen to have been
very active in pursuing the Award in letter and spirit by issuing various
communications including Government Orders for the setting up of
educational institutions between 1957 till date. The list of institutions as
on date, numbers 11, and many of them are aided by the State.
72. The State cannot be said to be in connivance with an illegal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
act, which would be the result if we were to hold that the appellant is an
encroacher on the 14.96 acres of land acquired under Award dated
15.10.1957.
73. We also are of the categoric opinion that absence of approval
by the Board of Revenue would have no impact. It is under
communication D.Dis 590-58A dated 29.01.1958 addressed by the
Deputy Tahsildar, Vedaranyam to the Sub-Collector, Nagapattinam, that
the possession of the lands in question have been handed over to the
Managing Trustee of the KGK Gurukulam pending approval of the
alienation proposals by the Board of Revenue.
74. Communication dated 29.01.1958 is extracted below:
D.Dis 590 – 58 A dated 29.01.1958
From To
T.Sambasivam, The Sub Collector,
Deputy Tahsildar, Nagapattinam
Vedaranyam
Sir,
Sub: Land Acquisition – Tiruthuraipundi Taluk –
InamMaharajapuram Kilpathi – Post Basic
School – Vedaranyam – Award No.7/57 –
Handing over the lands – report – submitted.
Ref: Division RC 9354 – 57N dated 28.01.58
On the morning of 29.01.58, I handed over
formally the possession of lands with trees, etc., as per Land
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
Transfer Certificate, to the Managing Trustee of the Kasturba
Gandhi Kanya Gurukulam, Vedaranyam pending the
approval of the alienation proposals by the Board of Revenue,
Madras. The Land Transfer Certificate received along with
the Division reference cited, is resubmitted.
(2) A copy of the Transfer Certificate of having
handed over the lands, etc., is submitted.
Sd.
30.01.58
Deputy Tahsildar
(Copy) to the Tahsildar, TRP with reference to the Dn.
Ref.cited (Copy marked to him) with a copy of the transfer
certificate for favour of information.
(Copy) to the Manager, the Kasturba Gandhi Kanya
Gurukulam, Vedaranyam.
75. The requirement for approval is only as the consideration is in
excess of Rs.10,000. Even assuming that such ratification had not been
made, we are of the view that the Award dated 15.10.1957 would not
stand compromised, having regard to the long and undisturbed
possession of the lands in question by the appellant and the management
of the aided Government Institutions by them, in partnership with the
State.
76. As far as the Gazette Notification vesting the Settlement in the
State is concerned, no records have been produced to detail the procedure
followed prior to such vesting, as provided for under the Inam Estates
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
(Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act. That apart, there is a
seamless flow of efforts commencing from Award dated 15.10.1957, till
2021 when the proposal for construction of the bus stand had first been
mooted. Thus, there is really no necessity for a Declaration in regard to
the right of the Appellant to the lands in question.
77. Hence, we conclude that the Notification, to the extent to
which it seeks to deal with the lands awarded to KGK Gurukulam, as
well as the consequent entries in the Settlement Register and other
revenue records, would have no force, as they seek to deal with the lands
that have already been acquired for the setting up of educational
institutions by KGK Gurukulam.
78. For the aforesaid reasons, we conclude that the Award is a
complete and legally sacrosanct document enforceable by the
beneficiaries, ie., KGK Gurukulam.
79. Having thus accepted the appellant’s claim for ownership and
possessory right over the lands in question based on Award dated
15.10.1957, we now proceed to balance the interests of the parties. The
map enclosed as Annexure I reveals that even if the proposal were to be
confirmed, it would not disturb any of the institutions and the bus stand
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
would be on land that is vacant, though the Appellant has stated that
those lands are being used as play grounds for the students.
80. Undoubtedly, a public convenience, such as a bus stand, must
be accorded preference over private interest. The photographs circulated
by the State show that the construction of the bus stand is at an advanced
stage, and demolition at this point, would be a national waste.
81. We hence accept the alternate prayer of the appellant in
W.P.No.6782 of 2023 and direct the appropriate official respondents, ie.,
R1 to R6 to initiate forthwith the procedure for acquisition of the lands
demarcated in pink in the enclosed map in terms of the provisions of the
2013 Act and in any event, not beyond a period of four (4) weeks from
date of uploading of this judgment in the official website of this Court.
Further progress in regard to the construction of the bus stand shall
continue only post, and subject to the initiation of the proceedings as
aforesaid.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
82. These Writ Appeals are allowed in terms of this judgment with
directions as aforesaid to the official respondents. No costs. Connected
Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
[A.S.M., J] [C.K., J]
03.06.2025
Index: Yes
Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes
Sl
To
1.The Government of Tamil nadu
Rep. By its Principal Secretary,
Department of Revenue and
Disaster Management,
Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Commissioner,
Commissionerate of Revenue and Disaster,
Management, Ezhilagam,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The District Collector
Nagapattinam.
4.The District Revenue Officer,
Nagapattinam.
5.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Nagapattinam.
6.The Tahsildar,
Vedaranyam
7.The Commissioner
Municipality, Vedaranyam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
W.A.Nos.2322 & 2323 of 2023
DR. ANITA SUMANTH.,J.
and
C.KUMARAPPAN.,J.
sl
W.A.Nos. 2322 & 2323 of 2023
C.M.P.Nos. 6043, 10053 of 2025, 26003,
26007 of 2024 & 19810 & 19814 of 2023
03.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/06/2025 06:54:39 pm )
