V. KANNAPPAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition for Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent dtd. 18/10/2021 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to register the rectification deed dtd. 18/10/2021 within a time frame as fixed by this Court.

(2.) The petitioner aggrieved against the assignment of a Oorani in favour of the respondents 6 to 8 by the 2nd respondent has filed the present petition.

(3.) Facts leading to the present round of litigation is that the Alwar naicker Oorani which is situate in Old Pymash No.316-319, which was assigned S.F.No.282 under the resurvey and further subdivided into 282/1, 282/7 and 282/8 of Naranapuram Village, originally belonged to Akkal Naicker @ Venkatasamy. Thereafter, the petitioner and his two brothers, succeeded to the property as legal heirs. In the earlier litigations of the year 2021 in A.S.No.46/24, as per the Compromise Decree, the land was declared to be that of Venkatasway Naicker and therefore, the possession continued with the family of the petitioner right from that date. While so, the entire village of Naranapuram was notified and taken over by the Government under the Tamil Nadu Estate (Abolition and Conversion into Ryothwari) Act, (Act 26/1948) and ryothwari settlement was introduced on 1/10/1951 and in the said Act, the lands in question has been registered as private oorani and it vested with the Government, and no claim from any one was entertained and the claim made by the petitioner has been specifically rejected by the Government vide order dtd. 22/3/1996. While so, one Chinna Narayanasamy and Andalammal managed to obtain patta in respect of this oorani and the land in question was reclassified and shown as ''Assessed Waste Dry''. However, when claimed title over the said lands, the District Revenue Officer, Virudhunagar, by his proceedings dtd. 19/8/94, cancelled the assignment made in favour of the said two persons and thereafter, the descendants of the said persons/respondents 9 to 14 seems to have moved the Commissioner, as against the orders of the 3rd respondent dtd. 19/8/1994. The 2nd respondent without proper appreciation of the facts and circumstances, allowed the revision filed by the respondents 6 and 7 herein and the 6th respondent started to take steps to plot out the said Oorani. It is also alleged that the resident association has also given petitions to the authorities, relating to the issue. It is therefore necessary that the impugned orders of the 2nd respondent dtd. 16/5/2000 be cancelled. Therefore, the present petition is filed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that patta was issued not under the Main Act, but under G.O.Ms.NO.1300, Revenue Department, dtd. 30/4/1971, which disabled the persons who are in long possession and enjoyment of the land even prior to the taking over of the land, to apply for ryotwari patta. Therefore, to bring the private respondents within the purview and entitlement, the authorities and the assignees colluded to reclassify the land as ''Assessed Waste Dry'' and made assignment in favour of the private respondents, which is contrary to the provisions of the Act, and, hence prays for allowing of this petition.