V.Ramuthai v. The Commissioner Of Land Reforms

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.03.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI V.Ramuthai : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Land Reforms, Cheppakkam, Chennai - 600 005.

2.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

4.The Tahsildar, Thiruparankundram Taluk, Madurai.

: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take necessary action over the representation made by the 1/5

petitioner on various dates and release the lands from the list of lands enlisted under the Tamil Nadu Bhoodhaan Yagna Act, within the time period stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gururaj For Respondents : Mrs.K.Malathi, Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner seeks release of the subject lands from the Tamil Nadu Bhoodhaan Yagna, Act.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the Board is claiming donation by one Chinna Karuppa Thevar to the Board, as early as in the year 1961. It is the specific contention of the petitioner that the said Chinna Karuppa Thevar was not owning the subject S.No.140/3, which has been allegedly donated to the Board. In fact, it is the specific case of the petitioner that the said Chinna Karuppa Thevar, has signed as a witness to the sale deed conveying lands in favour of the Board. Therefore, the petitioner has given a representation as early as in March, 2022, for considering the subject land being released from the Board. The petitioner has further given a reminder on 27.06.2024, in this regard. In fact, the petitioner also relied on the communication of the Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram 2/5

Taluk, addressed to the District Collector in Na.Ka.No.3176/2022/C, dated 08.11.2023, recommending such release as sought for by the petitioner. The first respondent, however, has not passed any orders on the said representation, after taking into account the report of the Tahsildar, Thirupparankundram.

3.Considering the fact that the petitioner only seeks issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, it would suffice to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's application and also the report of the Tahsildar and pass final orders within a period of twelve [12] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 4.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 19.03.2025 Index :Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes/No MR 3/5

To 1.The Commissioner of Land Reforms, Cheppakkam, Chennai - 600 005.

2.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

4.The Tahsildar, Thiruparankundram Taluk, Madurai.

4/5

P.B.BALAJI.

, J.

MR 19.03.2025 5/5