Chinnu Muthappan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.11.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN Writ Petition No.9750 of 2019 and WMP Nos.10343 & 10345 of 2019 1.Chinnu Muthappan 2.Chandran Gurunathan 3.Rajappan Munusamy 4.Sekar Chinnu 5.Paramasivam Andiappan 6.Perumal Madhaiyan 7.Balasubramanian Chinnu 8.Govindaraj Chinnathambi 9.Lakshmi Velu 10.Murugaiyan Manickam 11.Ponnusamy Venkatappan 12.Gurunathi Chandran 13.Lakshman Kungi 14.Rajammal Venkatappan 15.Ganesan Kunji Gounder 16.Raja Govinthan 17.Maruthiyammal Gurunathan 18.Saravanan Shanmugam 1 / 10
19.Nagammal Sanjeevan 20.Sambu Shanmugam 21.Parvathi Sivaraj 22.Ponnesan Samappan 23.Dhanabagyam 24.Muniraj Kuthappan 25.Thangavel Chinnapaiyan 26.Murugan Pothan 27.Ponnudsmy Munudsmy 38.Pachiammal Pothan 29.Sathasivam Karuppachettyu 30.Madhappan Pasappan 31.Chinna Kannu Vellaiyan 32.Chinna Pothan Polli Gounder 33.Manikkam 34.Kullappa Madhu 35.Kittusamy 36.Vengudu Chinnappan 37.Subramani Muthu 38.Lakshmi Pushparaj 39.Sinthamani Sivan 40.Rani Murugan 41.Thirugnanasambandam Duraisamy 42.Murugesan Ponnappan 43.Pachiammal Madhaiyan 44.Yaja Paramasivam 2 / 10
45.Kala Muthu 46.Rajathi Perumal 47.Chinnaraj Lakshmappan 48.Rajamani Rajikhan 49.Govindaraj 50.Raj Muthappan 51.Mani Lakshman ....
Petitioners .Vs.
1.The District Collector Dharmapuri.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Dharmapuri.
3.The Tahsildar Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri.
4.Forest Settlement Officer Krishnagiri 5.The District Forest Officer Dharmapuri.
.. Respondents (R4 - cause title amended vide Order dt.02.07.2019 made in WMP No.11408/19 in WP.No.9750/19 by GJJ).
Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.137/1987/A dated 23.10.2015 on the file of the Fourth respondent, quash the same and direct the respondents 2 and 3 to issue Patta in pursuant to the orders in 3 / 10
Proceeding No.362 of 2004 dated 16.9.2006 on the file of the fourth respondent.
For Petitioners :
Mr.R.Selvakumar For Respondents :
Mr.C.Selvaraj Additional Government Pleade
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed by 51 petitioners in the nature of a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records relating to the order in Na.Ka.137/1987/A dated 23.10.2015, on the file of the 4th respondent, the Forest Settlement Officer at Krishnagiri and quash the same and direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents, District Collector, Dharmapuri and Revenue Additional Officer, Dharmapuri, to issue patta in pursuant to earlier order dated 16.09.2006 in proceedings No.362 of 2004, also on the file of the 4th respondent.
2.In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it had been stated that the writ petitioners are occupants of margin forest lands, known as Forest Poramboke lands in Seengadu Village in Palacode Taluk in Dharmapuri District. They had been in occupation and enjoyment and 4 / 10
cultivation of an extent of 440.43 acres of land, out of a total extent of 178.31.5 hectares in Survey No.3 of Seengadu Village, Thirumalvadi via, Dharmapuri District.
3.It is contended that they had converted the lands and are doing agricultural works for more than 60 years. It had been further stated that in 1986 the writ petitioners had approached the Tahsildar, Palacode in Dharmapuri District seeking patta. Since the lands had been classified as Poromboke, they were directed to approach the 3rd respondent who conducted field survey along with the 5th respondent. It was stated that it was the 4th respondent who has the power to delete the lands from the classification of forest Poromboke lands.
4.The 4th respondent, by proceedings dated 16.09.2006 in proceedings No.362 of 2004 had passed orders under Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 addressing the claim of the petitioners to continue to be in occupation of the said lands. Recommendation was 5 / 10
also issued to grant patta. In the said order of the 4th respondent dated 16.09.2006, it had been observed that the writ petitioners had been in occupation for a number of years and that they had converted the rocky soil into that of agricultural lands and are also doing cultivation.
5. Since no steps were taken to grant patta, the petitioners had given a further representation to the District Collector at Dharmapuri and to the Revenue Additional Officer at Dharmapuri. The said application had been again forwarded to the 4th respondent. 6.A new Officer had taken charge of the office of the 4th respondent. According to him, the order dated 23.10.2015 in Na.Ka.No.137/1987/A and the earlier order dated 16.9.2006 had been passed without considering all factors and therefore, he passed the impugned order rejecting the claim for patta. 7.There are two separate issues. One is claim to occupation and the other is the grant or otherwise of patta. The 4th respondent had rejected 6 / 10
the claim of the petitioners to be granted patta. But however, the Preceding Officer had recommended for grant of patta. If there has got to be different views taken then the petitioners should have been put on notice. There is no indication that notice had been served on the petitioners and there is no indication that the earlier order in the year 2006 had been set aside by any higher official. That order still stands. A parallel order had been passed which is the impugned order. There cannot be two separate proceedings on the same subject. 8.The procedure required in law should be followed by providing opportunity to the petitioners of being heard and their objections being addressed and giving a response why the earlier order dated 06.9.2006 has to be set aside by the same officer. The right of the respondents to proceed afresh in the manner known to law is recognized. The impugned order is however set aside.
9.The Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 7 / 10
22.11.2024 Index : Yes/No NCS : Yes/No KP 8 / 10
To 1.The District Collector Dharmapuri.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Dharmapuri.
3.The Tahsildar Palacode Taluk, Dharmapuri.
4.Forest Settlement Officer Krishnagiri 5.The District Forest Officer Dharmapuri.
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN.,J KP 9 / 10
Writ Petition No.9750 of 2019 22.11.2024 10 / 10