M. SALEEM BAIG Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SIVAGANGAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to furnish the certified copy of the order dated 26.3.1979.

(2.) A Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein it is stated that an extent of 5 acres of land in Survey No.20/1 and 225/5 of Mangudi village of Sivaganga Taluk was assigned to the petitioner by the Special Tahsildar [Assignment], Sivaganga, through his proceedings dated 31.3.1969, on free of cost. Later, the assignment was cancelled by the District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram @ Madurai, through his proceedings dated 26.3.1979 for violations of rules and conditions. After twenty four years, the assignee has filed the present writ petition seeking production of the order of cancellation. The assigned land was located in Mangudi village, Sivaganga Taluk, which was in composite Ramanathapuram District; at the time of assignment made, Sivaganga District was newly formed on 15.3.1985 and the records relating to the Sivaganga District were handed over to the Sivaganga District officials. The files relating to the cancellation of the above assignment was not handed over to the Sivaganga District. All the files relating to the issue were destroyed due to efflux of time. By knowing all the above facts, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) THE limited prayer sought in this writ petition is to furnish the certified copy of the order dated 26.3.1979. According to the petitioner, he is still in possession of the property and the said order of cancellation was not at all communicated to him. At any event, as the prayer sought in this writ petition is only for production of the copy of the order and when it is stated by the respondents that all the files relating to the subject matter were destroyed due to efflux of time, no such mandamus can be issued to the respondents for furnishing the documents sought in this writ petition, especially when that becomes an impossibility of performance. Therefore, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner, who claims to be in possession of the property even after such cancellation of assignment, the writ petition is dismissed, however with liberty to the petitioner to agitate the matter in a separate proceedings to protect his possession, in the manner known to law. No costs. W.P.M.P.No.41248 of 2003 is closed.