V.S.Chandrasekar v. The Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.06.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013 W.P.No.21648 of 2012:

V.S.Chandrasekar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, Vellore.

3. The Tasildhar, Vellore Taluk, Vellore District.

4. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Tharakeswarar Thirukoil, Vellore ... Respondents 1/10

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order of the second respondent bearing Na.Ka.d2/6263/2012 dated 09.05.2012 and quash the same and consequently directing the second respondent herein to grant No Objection Certificate to the petitioner for construction of a Commercial Complex based on his patta.

For Petitioner : M/s.V.Srimathi For Respondents :

For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Arunkumar Additional Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate (HR&CE) W.P.No.23049 of 2013:

V.S.Chandrasekar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Director of Settlement, Chepauk, Chennai.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, Vellore.

2/10

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vellore.

4. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Vellore.

5. Arulmigu Tharakeswarar Temple, Thottapalayam, Represented by its Executive Officer, Vellore.

6. The Local Planning Authority, Vellore, Vellore District, Represented by its Member Secretary.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent in Na.Ka.A2/1079/2013 dated 15.07.2013 and quash the same and direct the respondents to maintain the individual patta granted in favour of the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramesh For Respondents :

For R1 to R3 & R6: Mr.T.Arunkumar Additional Government Pleader For R4 & R5 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate (HR&CE) 3/10

COMMON ORDER By this common order both the writ petitions are being dismissed.

2. The order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vellore, in a proceeding dated 15.07.2013, is under challenge in W.P.No.23049 of 2013.

3. The petitioner states that he is the owner of the land and building in S.No.1455/2, having an extent of 0.0820.0 Sq.mts, bearing Door No.2/1, Katpadi Road, Vellore.

4. The petitioner himself states that the fifth respondent temple filed O.S.No.917 of 1974, before the District Munsif Court, Vellore, for a permanent injunction.

4/10

5. The patta was initially granted in the name of the writ petitioner and the fourth respondent temple filed an application under the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983, to cancel the patta granted in favour of the writ petitioner. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vellore, conducted an enquiry by affording an opportunity to all the parties and cancelled the patta granted in favour of the writ petitioner, mainly on the ground that the petitioner has not established his title over the patta.

6. The order impugned states that the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before the District Revenue Officer, Vellore, within a period of 30 days.

7. The petitioner has not chosen to file an appeal as contemplated under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. The petitioner has filed a writ petition raising several grounds on merits, which cannot be adjudicated in the writ proceedings. The power of judicial review of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot be extended for the purpose of adjudication. 5/10

8. Adjudication of disputed facts regarding the title, ownership or otherwise, are to be done with reference to the documents and evidence in original before the Civil Court of Law.

9. Admittedly the petitioner has not preferred an appeal as contemplated under the said Act. The Revenue Divisional Officer in the impugned order has stated that the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal exhausting the appellate remedy is the rule and entertaining a writ petition is an exception. Findings of the Original Authority and the Appellate Authority will be of greater assistance to the High Court for the purpose of exercising power of judicial review in an effective manner.

10. That apart, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the first to third respondent and the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the HR&CE Department made a submission that the temple filed O.S.No.158 of 2007 and a decree was already passed in favour of the temple. Based on the decree, execution proceedings are also instituted and this being the factum, the 6/10

Revenue Authorities cannot decide the issues regarding cancellation of patta or otherwise.

11. Copy of the decree passed in O.S.No.158 of 2007, has been submitted before this Court. This being the factum, the parties have to resolve the issues through Civil Court of Law and the Revenue Authorities are bound by the decree already passed by the Civil Court of Law.

12. Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act, 1983, reads as under:- "14. Bar of suits.- No suit shall lie against the Government or any officer of the Government in respect of a claim to have an entry made in any patta pass book that is maintained under this Act or to have any such entry omitted or amended:

Provided that if any person is aggrieved as to any right of which he is in possession, by an entry made in the patta pass book under this Act, he may institute a suit for a declaration of his rights under Chapter VI of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (Central Act 47 of 1963); and the entry in the patta pass book shall be amended in accordance with any such declaration."

7/10

13. The decree passed by the competent Civil Court of Law is binding on the Revenue Authorities. Thus, the decree now produced before this Court is to be presented before the Revenue Authorities for the purpose of initiating appropriate action in the manner known to law.

14. With these observations and directions, the writ petition stands dismissed. Accordingly, W.P.No.21648 of 2012, is also dismissed. No cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 19.06.2023 Index : Yes/ No Speaking/Non-speaking Order rgm 8/10

To

1. The Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, Vellore.

3. The Tasildhar, Vellore Taluk, Vellore District.

4. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Tharakeswarar Thirukoil, Vellore

5. The Director of Settlement, Chepauk, Chennai.

6. The District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, Vellore.

7. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vellore.

8. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Vellore.

9/10

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

rgm

9. The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Tharakeswarar Temple, Thottapalayam, Vellore.

10. Member Secretary, The Local Planning Authority, Vellore, Vellore District, and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2013 19.06.2023 10/10