K. Veerassamy v. The District Revenue Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.10.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI K. Veerassamy ... Petitioner Vs The District Revenue Officer, Cum Competent Authority For UDR Rectification, DRO Office, District Collector Office Campus, Trichy 1, Trichy District.

...Respondent

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to make necessary rectification in revenue records pertaining to classification of the petitioner's property situated at Trichy District, Trichy West Taluk, Panjappur Village, S.F.No.21/5, measuring Acre 1.50 cents, in the light of his representation dated 20.10.2015.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar For Respondents : Mr.G.Surya Ananth Additional Government Pleader 1/6

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to make necessary rectifications in the Revenue records for the land in S.No.21/5 to an extent of 1.50 cents, Panjappur Village, Trichy West Taluk, Trichy District by considering his representation, dated 20.10.2015.

2.In response to this writ petition, the District Revenue Officer, Trichy has filed a counter affidavit stating that Panchapur Village is a Inam Village taken over by the Government under the Madras Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (Madras Act 26 of 1963) and through the settlement proceedings, this land in S.No.21/5 to an extent of 1.10.5 Ares was classified as Sarkar Punjai and in the remarks it is mentioned as Tharisu. However, this petitioner has purchased this property along with his wife one Kaliselvi by way of a registered document in the year 1982 and submitted a representation in the year 2016. In view 2/6

of the endorsement, there is no possibility for issuing patta for the subject land to this petitioner.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along with his wife has purchased this property by way of a registered sale deed. The Panchappur Village is not an Inam Village and it is Ryot Village. He also claims that one V.T.Krishnamachari has settled the property in favour of his daughter Vedhammal through a deed in the year 1955 and from Vedammal, one Solai Gounder has purchased the property by way of a registered document in the year 1960. From the said Solai Goundar, one Chellapappa has purchased the land in the year 1968 by way of a registered document 1149/1968 and from Chellapappa, the petitioner's vendor Palanisamy has purchased the land through a registered sale deed, 2785/1969.

4.This Court considered the rival submissions made. 3/6

5.The petitioner seeks patta for the subject land based on certain registered documents. The respondents have taken a stand that the land in S.No.21/5 of Panjappur Village is an Inam land taken over by the Government as per the Madras Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (Madras Act 26 of 1963) and during the settlement proceedings, this land was classified as Sarkar punjai and also as Tharisu.

6.In view of the endorsement made in the revenue records, this Court cannot grant any positive direction to the respondents for issuance of patta to the petitioner for the subject land. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. No costs.

03.10.2023 NCC: Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes vrn 4/6

To The District Revenue Officer, Cum Competent Authority For UDR Rectification, DRO Office, District Collector Office Campus, Trichy 1, Trichy District.

5/6

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

vrn Order made in 03.10.2023 6/6