ANJAMMAL DECEASED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners have filed this writ petition praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandmus by calling for the records of the Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Madras representing State of Tamil Nadu, the first respondent herein relating to his order in proceedings CLA.D.Dis.K.1 R.P. 23/81 dated 18.7.1986 confirming the orders of the Settlement Officer. Thanjavur passed in his proceedings SRI/80 Madras Central Act 30/63 dated 28.2.1981, upholding the orders of the Assistant Settlement Officer, Villupuram in his proceedings SR 1/78 Act 30/63 dated 23)7.1980 granting ground rent patta in respect of T.S. No. 16 Block No. 38 of Puliyur Village, Kodambakkam, Madras under Section 13 (1) of the Act 30/63 in favour of the respondents 5 to 9 and to quash the said order and further to direct the Commissioner of Land Administration, the first respondent herein to dispose of the proceedings regarding the issuance of ground rent patta by giving due opportunity to the petitioners to make their submissions, on merits.

(2.) THIS case involves a chequered history, which is given hereunder:- " (a) Puliyur is a estate village taken over by the Government under Act XXVI/48. The lands in T.S. No. 21/2 of Block No. 39 and T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 of Puliyur village were recognised as minor inams. These lands have been notified under the Tamilnadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act 30/63, as the Inam and these lands stood transferred to Government and vested in mem under the said Act. (b) The Settlement Thasildar No. III Branch Settlement office, Chengalpattu took up suo motu enquiry and passed orders dated 19.5.1971 granting ground rent patta for T.S. No. 21/2 of Block No. 39 in favour of Salesion Sisters' Society of India, Madras and T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 to K.M. Ahamadullah Badsha and his family. (c) One K.P. Ganapathy Iyer, the power Agent of V. Appaswamy Pathar objecting to the grant of patta, filed an appeal against the said order before the Tribunal at Madras in I.A.T. No. 1 of 1977. (d) After hearing me oarties, the Tribunal by the order dated 13.12.1977 remanded the matter to Settlement Tahsildar for fresh enquiry and disposal. Accordingly, the Assistant Settlement office, Villupuram conducted enquiry. (e) During the enquiry, one Venkatachala Pathar as a power of Attorney of Anjammal, wife of Kalyanasundara Pathar filed objection stating that she was alone entitled for patta for the land in T.S. No. 16, as she is the lawful heir of the said Kalyanasundara Pathar. Ganapathi Iyer, the power Agent of Appaswamy Pather objected to the said claim stating that the said Anjammal was not the legal heir. (f) The respondent in the said petition, K.M. Ahmadullah Badsha also filed a written statement claiming that his father Akbar Badsha purchased the said land T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 about 41 grounds and other adjoining properties under eight sale deeds between the years 1938 and 1945 and from then onwards, they were in continuous and uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the entire lands. (g) After the death of Akbar Badsha, notices under Section 9(2) of the Madras Survey and Boundaries Act 1923 for the lands including T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 of Puliyur village were issued to the heirs of Akbar Badsha. (h) In the meantime, the Government of Tamilnadu acquired the lands in T.S. No. 21. Since there were rival claimants to the heirs of Akbar Badsha, the Land Acquisition Proceedings were referred to Civil Court. (i) On conclusion of enquiry, the Court awarded compensation to the heirs of Akbar Badsha. The rival claimants in the Land Acquisition proceedings claiming ownership of the various portions of the lands including T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 were prosecuted by the State on various charges for offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code for having used forged documents for claiming the property in question and ultimately, they were sentenced to imprisonment in S.C. No. 39 of 1972. On appeal, the High Court confirming the convictions dismissed the same. (j) After enquiry, giving opportunity to the parties concerned, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Villupuram by the order dated 23.7.1980, concluded that the claimants including the petitioners have failed to prove and substantiate their claim for patta T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 and further held that the respondents, K.M. Ahamadullah Badsha and his family members have let in convincing evidence to show that they would be entitled to the patta and that they were in possession and enjoyment of me land continuously. Ultimately, he passed an order directing issuance of ground rent patta for T.S. No. 16 of Block No. 38 in favour of K.M. Ahamadullah Badsha and the members of his family. (k) Aggrieved by the above order, one Venkatachala Pathar, the power Agent, on behalf of Anjammal, filed a revision before the Settlement Officer SR II, Thanjavur. After finishing the enquiry, by hearing the parties concerned, the settlement officer by me order dated 28.2.1981 held that the revision petitioners had not established their case for grant of patta for the suit land, while the respondents have made out their case by producing cogent and valid evidence and consequently, dismissed the revision having not found any ground to interfere with the orders passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer. (l) As against this order, Venkatachala Pathar, the power Agent of Anjammal filed second revision in R.P. No. 23 of 1981 before the special commissioner for Land Administration, who in turn, dismissed the same by the order dated 18.7.1986. (m) Strangely, Anjammal and her daughter Jothilakshmi have filed this writ petition challenging the above orders straightaway making their power Agent as fourth respondent herein. (n) During the pendency of the writ petition, the first petitioner Anjammal died and on the memo, the second petitioner Jothilakshmi, the daughter of the first petitioner Anjammal, is representing the proceeding".