Nagappan, v. The District Revenue Officer,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and W.M.P.No.25654 of 2017 1.Nagappan 2.Jiappan ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri - 635 001.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Krishnagiri - 635 001.
3.The Tahsildar, Bargur Taluk, Bargur, Krishnagiri District.
4.The Commissioner, HR & CE, Chennai - 600 005.
5.The Joint Commissioner (Land Administration), Chennai.
6.Arulmigu Pattalamman Temple, Salinayanapalli Village, Bargur Taluk, Krishnagiri District - 635 104.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order of the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri in Na.Ka.No.2477/2016/L.R.2 dated 03.03.2017 and quash the said orders and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to restore the Patta in favour of the petitioners in respect of the land an extent of 3.62 acres in Survey Number. 813, Salinayanapalli Village, Krishnagiri Taluk (Now Bargur Taluk) Krishnagiri District.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.E.A.Dinesh For R1 to R3 : Mr.C.Jayaprakash, Government Advocate For R4 to R6 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan, Government Advocate (HR & CE)
O R D E R
The order of the District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri in proceedings dated 03.03.2017 is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.
2. Further direction is sought for to restore the patta in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land to an extent of 3.62 acres in Survey No. 813, Salinayanapalli Village, Krishnagiri Taluk (Now Bargur Taluk) Krishnagiri District. The petitioners state that they are the absolute owners of the subject property and they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. Patta stood in the name of the 6th respondent / Arulmigu Pattalamman Temple. In respect of the patta stood in the names of the Temple, the petitioner set out the claim for grant of patta in their name.
3. The order impugned reveals that by mistake, the name of the owner has been changed in the UDR records and the petitioners name were wrongly included in the UDR records. However, the mistake was identified and subsequently, by invoking the powers under the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983, the District Revenue Officer initiated proceedings. The District Revenue Officer conducted an enquiry and
verified the revenue records and it was found that it was a Service Inam land belonging to the Pattalamman Temple / 6th respondent and the name of the petitioners were inserted erroneously. Thus, the names of the petitioners were mistakenly entered in the UDR patta was directed to be deleted and the District Revenue Officer ordered to make entries in the necessary revenue records as Pattalamman Temple.
4. If at all the petitioner claims title in respect of the property and holding any documents to establish his title, he has to approach the competent Civil Court of law. As far as the revenue authorities are concerned, they have conducted an enquiry and found that the name of the petitioner was wrongly included in the UDR patta, which was subsequently cancelled through the impugned order and necessary entries were made in the name of the Temple. That being the factum, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impunged passed by the respondent.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently,
the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 17.08.2023 skr Index : Yes Speaking order To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri - 635 001.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Krishnagiri - 635 001.
3.The Tahsildar, Bargur Taluk, Bargur, Krishnagiri District.
4.The Commissioner, HR & CE, Chennai - 600 005.
5.The Joint Commissioner (Land Administration), Chennai.
6.Arulmigu Pattalamman Temple, Salinayanapalli Village, Bargur Taluk, Krishnagiri District - 635 104.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
skr 17.08.2023