V SANKARAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition came to be posted before this Court on being specially ordered by the Honble Chief Justice vide order dated 27.07.2010.

(2.) THE three petitioners have filed the present writ petition seeking to challenge the proceedings dated 27.02.1998 passed by the second respondent Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Ceiling), Tambaram and after setting aside the same seeks for a direction to the third respondent Tahsildar, Tambaram, to grant necessary patta in respect of the petitioners land comprised in S.No.382/5 to the extent of 0.38 acres in Tambaram Village in favour of the petitioners.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioners that first and second petitioners are brothers and the third petitioner is the widow of another deceased brother. They are the sole legal heirs of their father V.Vaidyalingam Iyer, who died on 07.12.1992. Their mother Gomathiammal also died on 28.04.1997. The land in question measuring to an extent of 0.38 acres in S.No.382/5 in Tambaram Village originally belonged to one Narayanaswamy Reddiar. The petitioners father purchased the land from the erstwhile land owner and his wife by a registered sale deed dated 22.11.1966. Ever since the date of purchase, till the date of his death on 07.11.1972, the petitioners father was in possession and enjoyment of the said property. After the death of their father, they have also partitioned the properties under a registered deed of partition dated 18.01.1973. The three sons equally shared the vacant land having 1/3rd share therein, viz., 12-2/3 cents of land to each of them. When they approached the concerned Village Administrative Office for transfer of patta for the said land, they were informed that the land was dealt with by the second respondent namely Assistant Commissioner (Urban Land Ceiling). IT was also found that since the vendor of the property Narayanaswamy Reddiar did not file any statement under Section 7(1) of the Act, notice under Section 7(2) was served by Affixture to a pole erected in the land. As no response or objections were received from him, a further notice under Section 9(1) r/w statement under Section 9(4) of the Act was served on their vendor. They were further informed that on 17.02.1998, an inspection was conducted and the lands were found to be house sites. An order under Section 9(5) of the Act was passed taking over 1050 Sq.mts of land leaving the balance 500 sq.mtrs to the benefit of the erstwhile land owner. A notice under Section 10(1) was given separately. Thereafter, orders were passed under Section 11(5). The petitioners on coming to know of these developments, made an application for getting certified copies of those proceedings and have come forward to challenge the same.