Gurjala Gopi Krishna v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND W.M.P.Nos.44631 & 44702 of 2025 Gurujala Gopikrishna .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 2.The Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 3.The District Collector, Chennai District Rajaji Salai, Fourth Floor, 62, Beach Road George Town, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 001 4.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai 600 028 5.The District Registrar Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai District 6.The Tahsildar Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai District .. Respondents 1/6
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the directing the respondents 1 to 6 to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2025 by verifying the Inam Fair Register (IFR), settlement and correlating revenue records and consequently issue the Adangal, 1B extract, Sethuvar confirmation and computerized Ryotwari patta in respect of the petitioner's ancestral agricultural lands measuring Ac.3053.00 in Survey Nos. 657, 658, 658/1A, 657/4A and 657/4C situated at Pallikaranai Village No. 119, Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai District (formerly Kancheepuram District).
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vedhavel For RR1 to 3 & 6 : Mr.R.Ramanlaal Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader For RR4 & 5 : Mr.R.Sasikumar Government Advocate
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to deal with the representation made by the petitioner on 06.09.2025, wherein, the petitioner is seeking for issuance of patta with respect to the subject properties.
2/6
2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
3. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 and 6 brought to the notice of this Court, the recent judgment dated 07.10.2025 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.3213 of 2024. This judgment was passed by the Division Bench based on a case that was filed by the father of the petitioner, who sought for issuance of patta in the very same locality. The Division Bench, while dismissing the writ appeal, has held as follows : "4. Perusal of the cause title shows that Mrs. K. Baby is the General Power of Attorney holder of Mr. G. Jayachandra Naidu/appellant. G. Jayachandra Naidu resides in Andhra Pradesh, and Mrs. K. Baby resides at Perumbakkam, Chennai. The property in question is valuable Government land classified as Backwater.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the kist has been paid.
6. The aforesaid contention is unacceptable. Mere payment of property tax or kist would not confer any property right. Moreover, the authorities are bound to protect the water body and Government lands. In the event of encroachment, encroachers are to be removed by following the procedures. The appellant has not established even a semblance of legal right. Thus, the Writ Court is right in dismissing the writ petition. However, this Court finds that the very claim set out by the appellant is vexatious. 3/6
7. The authorities are directed to conduct an inspection of the entire extent of the subject land and, if any encroachment is identified, such encroachers are to be evicted by following the procedures as contemplated under relevant statutes and rules in force. This exercise shall be completed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The water body shall be maintained as a water body in public interest. Preserving water is a constitutional mandate; failure on the part of the authority would result in initiation of prosecution, and the officials accountable must be subjected to departmental proceedings.
8. Consequently, the writ appeal is dismissed with the costs of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) to be paid in favour of the District Collector, Chennai District. The connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed."
4. In the considered view of this Court, as a Single Judge, I am bound by the decision of the Division Bench and more particularly, since that the case is also in respect of the very same locality. In view of the same, the relief as sought for in the present writ petition cannot be granted by this Court and accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Connected W.M.Ps are closed. 13.11.2025 gya Index : Yes/No 4/6
To 1.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 2.The Commissioner of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 3.The District Collector, Chennai District Rajaji Salai, Fourth Floor, 62, Beach Road George Town, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 001 4.The Inspector General of Registration Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai 600 028 5.The District Registrar Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai District 6.The Tahsildar Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai District 5/6
N. ANA ND VENKATESH , J.
gya 13.11.2025 6/6