Madras High Court
The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs Mrs.Jabapackiam on 16 October, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, Mohammed Shaffiq
W.A. No.3477 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.10.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.A. No.3477 of 2024
and
C.M.P. No.27066 of 2024
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. By the Secretary to
Government Municipal Administratio,
and Water Supply Department, Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Chengalpattu District,
Chengalpattu.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Chengalpattu District,
Chengalpattu. ... Appellant(s)/ Respondents 1-3
Vs.
1.Mrs.Jabapackiam,
W/o.Mrs.Israel Dharmaraj,
No.23, Elemalai Street,
Radha Nagar, Chrompet,
Chennai-600 044. ... Respondent/ Writ Petitioner
2.The Municipal Commissioner,
Pallavaram Municipality,
Chrompet, Chennai-600 044.
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/10/2025 12:24:29 pm )
W.A. No.3477 of 2024
3.The Commissioner,
Tambaram Corporation,
Tambaram, Chennai-600 045. ... Respondent(s)/Respondents 4 to 7
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to
set aside the order dated 19.12.2023 made in W.P. No.21787 of 2022.
For Appellant(s) : Mr.J.Ravindran
Additional Advocate General
assisted by
Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent 1 : Mr.S.Silambannan
Senior Counsel
for M/s.Kavya Silambannan Associates
For R2 to R4 : Mr.P.Srinivas
For R5 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Writ Order dated 19.12.2023 in W.P.No.21787 of 2022 is sought to
be assailed in the present Intra-Court Appeal instituted under Clause 15
of the Letters Patent. The State preferred the appeal mainly on the
ground that title dispute existed in respect of the subject land presently
Hasthinapuram Bus Stand. The Revenue Divisional Officer after
adjudication, relegated the parties to approach the competent Civil Court
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/10/2025 12:24:29 pm )
of law for the purpose of crystallising their civil rights. However, the Writ
Court though recorded the said finding, allowed the writ petition on the
ground that the 1st respondent produced a copy of the sale deed in his
favour.
2. Application had been submitted by the 1st respondent seeking
patta under the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. Since, it was rejected, the
writ petition came to be instituted. The Writ Court directed the Revenue
Divisional Officer to conduct an enquiry and pass final orders. The
Revenue Divisional Officer conducted an enquiry on the representation
filed by the writ petitioner, issued proceedings dated 08.07.2022.
3. Perusal of the said order would show that rival claims are set out
beyond the claim made by the Government on the ground that subject
land is a Government Poramboke Land. Thus, the Revenue Divisional
Officer, Tambaram, arrived at a conclusion that parties have approached
the Civil Court for the purpose of establishing their rights. However, the
Writ Court made a finding that the 1st respondent / writ petitioner
produced a sale deed. That apart, patta has already been granted in
favour of the adjacent land owners. Therefore the 1st respondent is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/10/2025 12:24:29 pm )
entitled to get patta under the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983.
4. Section 3 of the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983, enumerates that the
owner of the land is entitled to get patta. Rule 4(4) of the Patta Pass
Book Rules, stipulates that in the event of any rival claim, the revenue
authorities are bound to relegate the parties to approach the competent
Civil Court of law for the purpose of resolving the issues. Therefore,
application under Patta Pass Book Act, is not maintainable if any dispute
exists.
5. In the present case, the 1st respondent and rival claimant are
claiming ownership. That apart, the Government states that
Hasthinapuram Bus Stand is functioning for the past about 50 years. As
per the Land Survey Register, the land belongs to Government. As the
Writ Court in its exercise of judicial review cannot form an opinion
regarding title/ ownership. Thus, the relief granted in the impugned writ
order falls beyond the realm of the powers of judicial review.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances, the parties are at liberty
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/10/2025 12:24:29 pm )
to approach the Civil Court of law and only after reaching finality, they
are entitled to seek remedy either under the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983,
or any other relevant provisions of law depending on the outcome of the
Civil Suit.
7. Consequently, the writ order dated 19.12.2023 in W.P. No.21787
of 2022 is set aside and the Writ Appeal stands allowed. No costs. The
connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
16.10.2025
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/ No
mka
To:
1.The Municipal Commissioner,
Pallavaram Municipality,
Chrompet, Chennai-600 044.
2.The Commissioner,
Tambaram Corporation,
Tambaram, Chennai-600 045.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/10/2025 12:24:29 pm )
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
mka
16.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/10/2025 12:24:29 pm )
