LAWS(MAD)-2015-11-234

E SEKAR Vs. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU SECRETARIAT ST FORT GEORGE, CHENNAI; DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT; PROJECT OFFICER, SIPCOT SIRUSERI OLD MAHABALIPURAM ROAD

Decided On November 20, 2015
E Sekar Appellant
V/S
Secretary Department Of Revenue Government Of Tamilnadu Secretariat St Fort George, Chennai; District Collector, Collectorate Kancheepuram District; Project Officer, Sipcot Siruseri Old Mahabalipuram Road Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing.

(2.) Petitioner's father filed a suit earlier in O.S.No.110 of 1981 on the file of District Munsif Court, Chengalpattu seeking relief of permanent injunction. In the said suit, the plaintiff has admitted that the land originally belong to pious minded Chettiar community at Madras and the ancestors of the plaintiff were placed in possession by the said persons. The learned District Munsiff observed that the plaintiff will have to establish his title independently. They have been in possession from 1975 onwards. The suit properties are poramboke land and claim of adverse possession can be made only by true owner, namely, Government. In the suit filed, the proceedings of the District Collector which is relied upon by the petitioner before this Court and also before the respondent, who passed the impugned order, curiously was not relied upon. Incidentally, in the impugned order, the respondents have doubted the veracity of the said documents as it is not available with the Collectorate.

(3.) The property which is the subject matter of these proceedings was alienated by the Government by passing an order of G.O.Ms.No.10 Revenue Department, dated 03.1.2002 infavour of SIPCOT for development of IT park. Thereafter, the petitioner made an application for issuance of patta. Against the order of rejection, he filed an appeal. The actual handing over of the land was done on 04.11.2008 infavour of SIPCOT by District Administration. At that time, there was no encroachment found except few huts in SF.No. 40/1.