PALANIAMMAL Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR TIRUVANNAMALAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short facts of the case are as follows:-

(2.) The petitioner further submits that there was an attempt on the part of the second respondent to cancel the patta standing in her name and to reclassify the said land as Natham. The petitioner issued a telegraphic of notice on 08.08.2004 to the respondents 1 to 4. Before reclassifying the lands as Natham Poromboke, notice should have been given to her, but no opportunity or notice was given to her. After the receipt of the telegraphic notice dated 08.08.2004, the second respondent, viz., the Tahsildar had deliberately made an entry in the Chitta as per T.K.T.No.51/14121, dated 25.02.2003, 8a 267/1412, dated 04.03.2003 but signed the said transfer on 09.08.2004. Before converting a patta into Natham Poromboke land, the opportunity should have been given to her to reveal the petitioner's possession. Now, the third and fourth respondents orally expressed that they are going to take delivery of the petitioner's property within a short time. Under the circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court for a remedy after invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The above writ petition has been filed in the year 2004, but till now, the respondents have not filed a counter statement even though, an interim order is operating against them from 02.09.2004. Therefore, this Court is constrained to pass a final order since the matter is pending for more than eight years on this Court file.