Madras High CourtWP/29217/2022dismissed

Janaki.P v. Director Of Land Reforms

2022-11-07Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI P.Janaki .. Petitioner

Versus

1.The Director of Land Reforms Ezhilagam Chepaukkam Chennai - 600 005 2.The District Revenue Officer (Land Tribunal) 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Divisional Office 4.The Revenue Tahsildar Perundhurai Taluk 5.The Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms Office of the Assistant Commissioner (Land Reforms) .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the third respondent in pursuant to the impugned orders dated 19.02.2022 in Na.Ka.No.6488/2015/A4 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the third respondent to restore the Ayyan Patta granted in 1/4

favour of the petitioner by the 4th respondent by order dated 25.05.2017. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Murali For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 19.02.2022 in Na.Ka.No.6488/2015/A4 passed by the 3rd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the third respondent to restore the Ayyan Pattaa granted in favour of the petitioner by the 4th respondent by order dated 25.05.2017.

2. According to the petitioner, she was assigned with a land measuring to an extent of 2 Acre 50 cents in Re-Survey No.320/2, Engur Village vide Reference No.MR/IV/361/17-70 dated 17.05.1995 in accordance with Rule 8(6) of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Disposal of Surplus Land) Rules, 1965. Subsequently, on the recommendation of the third respondent vide order dated 16.12.2016, the fourth respondent herein passed an order dated 25.05.2017 including her name in Ayyan Patta in Survey No.320/2A. While so, the third respondent by way of the impugned order cancelled the Ayan Patta granted in her favour. Challenging the impugned cancellation order, this writ petition. 2/4

3. Though very many grounds raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he seeks this Court for a liberty to work out the petitioner's remedy in the manner known to law.

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court, without going into the merits of this case, grants liberty to the petitioner to work out the remedy in the manner known to law.

5. With the above liberty, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 07.11.2022 dhk Index:Yes/No To 1.The Director of Land Reforms Ezhilagam Chepaukkam Chennai - 600 005 2.The District Revenue Officer (Land Tribunal) 3.The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Divisional Office 3/4

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

dhk 4.The Revenue Tahsildar Perundhurai Taluk 5.The Assistant Commissioner of Land Reforms Office of the Assistant Commissioner (Land Reforms) W.P.No.29217 of 2022 07.11.2022 (1/2) 4/4