Madras High CourtWP(MD)/16653/2017dismissed

Seeniathal, v. The District Collector,

2017-09-05Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.09.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR W.P.(MD) No. 16653 of 2017 W.M.P.(MD)No. 13259 of 2017 Seeniathal ... Petitioner -Vs1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

2.District Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

3.Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli Revenue Division, Tirunelveli.

4.Deputy Superintendent of Police, Puliangudi, Tirunelveli District.

5.Tahsildar, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

6.Sub Inspector of Police, Sendamaram, Tirunelveli District.

7.Sundaraj 8.Nagachithiara Kumar 9.Veluchamy

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1, 3 and 5 to expedite and hear the appeal filed in the transfer to patta matter with respect to 0.07.0 ares in Survey No.93/10B in

Kulasekaramangalam, Revenue Village, in Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District as ordered by the 1st respondent in his proceedings O.Mu.A2/24927/2017 dated 05.07.2017 within a time frame fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene For R-1 to R6 : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian Special Government Pleader.

O R D E R

The petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1, 3 and 5 to expedite and hear the appeal file in the transfer to patta matter with respect to 0.07.0 ares in Survey No.93/10B in Kulasekaramangalam, Revenue Village, in Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District as ordered by the 1st respondent in his proceedings O.Mu.A2/24927/2017 dated 05.07.2017 within a time frame fixed by this Court.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 6.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is having three sisters and also owning land to an extend of 18 cents of punja land in Survey No.93/10-B in Kulasekaramangalam, Revenue Village, in Sankarankovil Taluk, in the joint name of all the sisters. However, it is stated that the fifth respondent changed the patta in the names of Sundaraj and Nagachithiara Kumar without any notice to the petitioner and her sisters with the help of one local Village Assistant.

4. It is further stated that on the basis of such illegal patta, the private respondents namely the respondents 7 and 8, sold a portion of the disputed land, in favour of one Veluchamy, the 9th respondent herein. Since the vendors of the 9th respondent has no right or title in the property, it is stated that the transfer of patta either in the name of vendors of the 9th respondent or in the name of the 9th respondent is not valid. 5.It is further stated that the 9th respondent, on the basis the sale deed dated 18.02.2016, is trying to grab the property with the help of police officials. Despite the fact that the petitioner has preferred an appeal as against the mutation of Revenue records in favour of private respondents before this Court, the respondent police are harassing the petitioner to vacate the property and to hand over the same to the 9th respondent. They are also threatening the petitioner that unless the petitioner vacate the property, a separate case will be

initiated against the petitioner. It is in this circumstances, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is constrained to file the above Writ Petition.

6. Having regard to the nature of averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this Court is able to see that the petitioner, who has got a claim on a part of the property, has to move the Civil Court for appropriate relief. Despite the fact that the patta was changed in the name of the third parties, the petitioner has not challenged the order at the appropriate time in the manner provided under Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act. Merely because it is stated that an appeal is pending as against the order transferring the patta in favour of third parties, this Court cannot presume that the petitioner is in lawful possession of the property or a statutory appeal is pending. The question, whether the petitioner is in lawful possession or not cannot be decided either by the revenue officials or by the police officials.

The petitioner has to establish his right by approaching the civil Court. The present petition filed before this Court is wholly misconceived and hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the civil Court to seek appropriate relief.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court to give a direction to the third respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the order of Tahsildar granting patta in favour of third parties. The petitioner has not produced papers relating to the appeal. However, the petitioner relied upon the order passed by the District Collector, dated 05.07.2017 by which the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli was directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 30.03.2017. This order also does not indicate that the petitioner has preferred an appeal against the order of Thasildhar. The petition preferred by the petitioner before the District Collector for change of patta in favour of the petitioner has been forwarded to RDO.

Since the representation was given to the District Collector for an early disposal, the District Collector has given a direction to consider the petitioner's representation. The petitioner has not produced patta pass book but the proceedings under Survey and Boundaries Act which is subject to further enquiry.

8.Since the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is not in a position to satisfy this Court that the petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal, this Court is not inclined to give any direction. However, this order shall not be taken advantage of by the contesting respondents so as to either claim title or possession in their favour with out any document of title or revenue records to trace title. The Civil Court will decide the question as to the possession or right independently, in case

either the petitioner or the contesting respondents approach the civil Court for any appropriate relief. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar.

To 1.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.