K.K.Balasubbaramanyan@Periya Thambi v. The Tahsildar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.03.2024 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY K.K.Balusubbaramanyan @ Periya Thambi ..
Petitioner Vs.
1. The Tahsildar Kodumudi 638 151 Erode District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Erode.
3. The District Collector Erode District, Erode.
4. Director Survey & Settlement Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
5. Commissioner of Land Administration Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
6. Inspector General of Registration 100, Santhome High Road R.A.Puram, Chennai - 600 028.
7. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary to Govt. Revenue Department, Fort St. George Chennai - 600 009.
..
Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to issue pattas, when applied to the eligible people of Kodumudi-A Village, Kodumudi Taluk, Erode District on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.221 dated 04.05.2023 after reclassifying the lands and applying appropriate nomenclature in the revenue records.
For the Petitioner :
Mr.K.Rajasekaran For the Respondents :
Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar State Government Pleader assisted by Mr.K.Karthik Jegannath Government Advocate
ORDER
(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.K.Rajasekaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar, learned State Government Pleader assisted by Mr.K.Karthik Jegannath, learned Government Advocate for respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition is filed in the nature of a public interest litigation. The properties are being classified as Government lands, though they are private lands owned by private persons. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as the lands are classified as Government lands, the people are not in a position to transfer the properties in Kodumudi-A Village.
3. The present petition is as vague as it could be. No details are given as to the ownership of a particular person referable to the survey number. Public interest litigation cannot be filed in such a casual manner. If a person, who is the owner of the property, is aggrieved by the classification of the property, he/she can challenge the said classification. It would not be a case of a public interest litigation. The petitioner is not at all concerned with the property of the village as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner. As far as the ownership is concerned, the same is a personal right.
4. In view of the above, the writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 28.03.2024 Index :
Yes/No :
Yes/No drm To
1. The Tahsildar Kodumudi 638 151 Erode District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Erode.
3. The District Collector Erode District, Erode.
4. Director Survey & Settlement Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
5. Commissioner of Land Administration Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
6. Inspector General of Registration 100, Santhome High Road R.A.Puram, Chennai - 600 028.
7. The Additional Chief Secretary to Govt.
The State of Tamil Nadu Revenue Department, Fort St. George Chennai - 600 009.
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
(drm) 28.03.2024