Murugan.K v. The Secretary
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.10.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P.(MD)No.12888 of 2023 1.K.Murugan
2. Thirumaran
3. Sabari Manikandan
4. Bose
5. Kannan
6. Karnan
7. Manivannan
...Petitioners
Vs
1. The Secretary, Aadi Dravidar Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2. The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.
3. The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Office of the Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.
4. The Special Thasildar Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Taluk Office, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to hand over the lands in Survey No.12/1G, 2A, 1H, 2B, 2 C to an extent of 1.24.00 Hecter lands in Theeyanur Village, Paramakudi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District which was 1/5
acquired for the purpose of house sites to Adi Dravidars (Arunthathiyinar) in Chathirakudi Village and the same is not utilized for the purpose for acquired. For Petitioners : Mr.D.Senthil For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate
ORDER
The petitioners seek a direction to handover the lands described in the writ petition to them.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the lands of the petitioner were acquired under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Harijan Welfare Schemes Act(Act 31 of 1978). In spite of the lapse of several decades, it is stated that the lands have not been put to use. Therefore, the petitioners seek the relief claimed.
3.Learned Government Advocate opposes the petition by referring to the award and pointing out that the revenue records have been mutated in favour of the Government. He also points out that the compensation amount has been deposited. In support of the contention that reconveyance is not permissible, learned Special Government Pleader relies upon the judgment of the Division 2/5
Bench of this Court in W.A(MD)No.1663 of 2010, The Government of Tamil Nadu and others Vs. Panayamma and others, judgment dated 24.04.2015, wherein it was held that there is no provision for reconveyance under Act 31 of 1978.
4.The record discloses that the acquisition proceedings were duly concluded and an award was issued. The RTI reply also reflects that the compensation amount was deposited. The Division Bench of this court concluded that Act 31 of 1978 does not provide for reconveyance. In these circumstances, the said relief claimed by the petitioners cannot be granted. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of by leaving it open to the petitioners to claim compensation in accordance with law. No costs. 16.10.2025 2/4 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR 3/5
To
1. The Secretary, Aadi Dravidar Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2. The District Collector, Office of the Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.
3. The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Office of the Collectorate, Ramanathapuram.
4. The Special Thasildar Adi Dravidar Welfare Department, Taluk Office, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. 4/5
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY , J.
RJR W.P.(MD)No.12888 of 2023 16.10.2025 2/4 5/5