W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 30.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.19607 and 19608 of 2024
S.M.P.Damodaran .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Assistant Commissioner,
Land Reforms/Urban Land Ceiling
and Urban Land Tax,
Madurai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Uthamapalayam,
Theni District.
3.The Thashildar,
Bodinaickkanur Taluk,
Theni District. .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating
to the impugned order bearing M.R.4/234/Bodi./B1 dated 09.07.2013
passed by the first respondent and quash the same in so for as the
petitioner's property in New Survey No.78/1AH, New patta No.1283,
_________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
Bodi North Hills Village, Bodinayakanur taluk, Theni District measuring
1 acre and 31 cents.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul
For Respondents : Mr.B.Saravanan
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Questioning the impugned order passed by the first respondent
behind the back of the petitioner, the petitioner is before this Court.
2. The petitioner seeks the issue of writ of certiorari to call for the
records of the impugned order dated 09.07.2013 passed by the first
respondent, quash the same, insofar as it relates to the petitioner’s
property comprised in S.No.78/1AH, new Patta No.1283 of Bodi North
Hills Village, Bodinayakanur Taluk, Theni District measuring an extent
of 1 Acre and 31 Cents.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the first respondent
herein has re-assigned land measuring a larger extent of 2 Acres and 31
_________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
Cents to one Alagarmani, son of Kalimuthumaniyam. Revenue records
were mutated in his name and he has been cultivating the lands.
Alagarmani sold part of the land measuring an extent of 1 Acre and 31
Cents to the petitioner under a registered sale deed dated 31.01.2011.
4. Assignment Condition No.8 clearly stipulates that the land
would vest absolutely on the assignee after value of the land, buildings
and trees thereon is paid in full, or after the expiry of a period of 20
years.
5. The petitioner’s contention is that Alagarmani had remitted full
value of the land and therefore, had become its absolute owner. He had
thereafter sold the property to the petitioner and he is cultivating the said
extent of 1 Acre and 31 Cents till date.
6. While so, the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer,
Uthamapalayam, by proceedings dated 02.06.2017 directed to conduct
survey and submit a report. The Taluk Surveyor, Bodinayakanur had
_________
Page 3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
conducted survey of the petitioner’s land and submitted a report dated
11.10.2017 to the third respondent confirming the petitioner’s possession
of the lands. The second respondent had directed the third respondent to
submit a report on the claim made by the petitioner for grant of F-Patta in
respect of the agricultural lands, which to date has not been done. The
petitioner was informed by the staff of the third respondent that in
October, 2023, the assignment made in favour of his vendor had been
cancelled on 09.07.2013.
7.The petitioner would submit that on perusing the impugned
order, he came to learn that the assignment given to his vendor had been
cancelled. Though he has been in possession and in cultivation of the
lands in question, no notice had been issued to him. Therefore, the
petitioner had immediately moved the District Collector on 09.07.2024
seeking to set aside the impugned order cancelling the assignment order.
Since the same has not been considered, the petitioner is before this
Court.
_________
Page 4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
8. Heard the learned counsel on either side.
9. The main ground on which the petitioner has filed this writ
petition is that before cancelling the assignment order in favour of his
predecessor in title Alagarmani, notice had not been served either on his
vendor, nor on himself. That apart, the assignment order has been
cancelled only on the ground that the property had been sold by the
assignees to others.
10. The contention of the petitioner is that Condition No.8 of the
assignment granted in favour of the said Alagarmani was that on the
payment of the entire land value, or after the expiry of the period of 20
years, the property would become the absolute property of the assignee.
The vendor Alagarmani had paid the entire consideration. Therefore, he
was an absolute owner and after he had become the absolute owner, there
has been no question of the respondents cancelling the patta. Had the
respondents issued a notice to the petitioner, he could have explained the
above. The impugned order has been passed unilaterally without notice
_________
Page 5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
to the original assignees and is a non-speaking one. In these
circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed, the impugned order is set
aside and the matter is remitted back to the first respondent, who shall
issue notice to the petitioner and the other assignees/subsequent
purchasers, hear them along with documents and pass orders on merits
and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
30.09.2024
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
abr
_________
Page 6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
To
1.The Assistant Commissioner,
Land Reforms/Urban Land Ceiling
and Urban Land Tax,
Madurai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Uthamapalayam, Theni District.
3.The Thashildar,
Bodinaickkanur Taluk,
Theni District.
_________
Page 7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
P.T.ASHA, J.
abr
W.P.(MD) No.23138 of 2024
Dated: 30.09.2024
_________
Page 8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis