ASSISTANT SETTLEMENT OFFICER Vs. MAYAJAL ENTERTAINMENT (P) LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Writ Appeals are directed against the orders made in W.P.No.25594 of 2015 and W.P.No.29465 of 2012, dtd. 10/9/2015 and 2/11/2012 respectively.

(2.) The brief facts of the case is that Kanathur Reddikuppam Village was taken over under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, (hereinafter referred as Act, 1948) by a Notification dtd. 7/3/1957 vide G.O.Ms.No.630 Revenue, dtd. 9/2/1957.

(3.) Settlement proceedings were initiated in the year 1959. The issue in the present Writ Petition is in respect of land in S.No.34/2 Reddikuppam Village. The total extent of land in S.No.34 was 5.85 Acres, has been sub-divided into two bearing S.No.34/1 measuring to an extent of 3.85 Acres and S.No.34/2, measuring to an extent of 2 Acres. On 5/5/2003, the respondent herein had made an application to the District Collector, Chengalpet District, seeking for grant of lease for a period of 30 years. Along with the said application he had also submitted all relevant documents including a signed Form-I stipulated for a request to lease of Government Poramboke lands. The Tahsildar, Chengalpet District, had also conducted an enquiry and forwarded a proposal for leasing the said lands for a period of 20 years by fixing the annual rent at Rs.22,41,596.00(Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Forty One Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Six Only) per annum to the District Collector, Chengalpet. The said proposal was returned by the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration as it was defective. On 13/7/2009, the Tahsildar forwarded the revised lease proposal by fixing the annual rent at Rs.22,76,918.00 (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighteen Only) to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengalpet. On 26/7/2011, the respondent herein had made representation to the 1st appellant herein for grant of Patta in respect of land in S.No.34/2, Kanathur Reddikuppam Village, alleging that he had purchased the property in the year 1999 and that they are in possession of the said land for over 12 years. Originally, the said request was rejected by the 1st appellant on the ground that he had no Authority to consider the request in view of the G.O.Ms.No.714, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowment dtd. 29/6/1987. The same was challenged by the respondent. This Court by order dtd. 21/9/2011 taking into consideration that no notice was given to the 1st respondent herein before rejecting its request the order of the 1st appellant was set aside with a direction to consider the application afresh after giving an opportunity and taking note of the relevant rules and notifications including that of delay and pass fresh orders within a period of two weeks.