V MARIARAJ Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed against the order passed by the first respondent/District Collector dated 06.01.2005. The petitioner filed a representation dated 17.06.2004 before the District Collector stating that in Survey No. 81 described as Kaliaurani the trees were planted by him. Being a ayacutdars of the Urani, he sought for permission to cut those trees.

(2.) The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P. No. 5663 of 2004. This Court by an order dated 09.03.2004 directed the District Collector to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.01.2001, 30.06.2003 and 13.01.2004 and to pass appropriate orders on his representation. The District Collector noted that Survey No. 81 in Kaliaurani Kanmai was given to one Theivanai Achi as a pattadar for the purpose of maintenance by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Sivagangai vide his proceedings dated 30.11.1956. The settlement for the Panangudi (Group) Village started in the year 1958. While doing the settlement work in the Assistant Settlement Officer's order, there is no record with reference to the assignment of the Urani in favour of any one. Therefore, whatever order passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer can be considered only as a provisional order.

(3.) It is also stated that in the Village accounts Survey No. 81 to the extent of 1.30.5 Hectares is recorded as Kalia Urani Kanmai and as 'Government Poramboke'. Therefore, the District Collector refused to acceede to the request of the petitioner for cutting the trees in the Urani.