C.PRABHU Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have come to this Court questioning the correctness of the impugned order dtd. 18/4/2016 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode, the second respondent herein, wherein the second respondent has indicated that till the enquiry is complete on the complaint given by Mr.K.V.Ponnaiyan in respect of the land covered in Survey No.582/2, the petitioners/pattadhars cannot proceed with any agricultural activity in their land.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that when the petitioners are the absolute owners of the land comprised in Survey No.582/2 at Chennimalai Village, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District measuring an extent of 6.47 acres, as per the pattas issued by the revenue authorities from the year 1927, and that they have been in possession of the same, for the reason that the land is in hillock area, the petitioners have taken steps to level the land for the purpose of utilising the same for agricultural and other purposes. Even the adjacent lands were also levelled by various persons and sold out as housing plots. One Mr.Prakash also flattened the place and fenced it. He had also proposed housing plots thereon. This apart, there are about 300 residential houses built up and also a Government High School near their land. Besides, a solid waste management godown is also in existence within 1 KM radius to the land of the petitioners. In addition thereto, the Government also have acquired some lands for LBP Ayacut within 1000 feet radius from the land of the petitioners. Therefore, when there is a school nearer to the land of the petitioners and also a solid waste management godown located within 1 KM radius from the land of the petitioners, the petitioners cannot be prevented from levelling the same only for the purpose of utilising the land in question for agricultural and other purposes. Hence, when they applied to the District Collector, Erode, the first respondent herein on 18/1/2016 seeking permission to level their land, they came to know that one organization called "Iyarkai Vala Padhukappu Iyakkam" had submitted their objections to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode not to permit the levelling work in the hill area, as this would affect the nature and also cause soil erosion by breaking the hill rocks available in the land of the petitioners. Based on the complaint, the impugned order has been passed by the second respondent stating that the petitioners cannot level their land. Only if the respondents find that the petitioners are mining the land illegally without getting any prior approval or permission from the competent authority, they can take action. But for levelling the land by the pattadhars, the respondents cannot have any objection. Even if there is an objection, the same has to be overruled, citing a reason that the petitioners are only levelling their land. Without doing so, the respondents are unnecessarily preventing the petitioners from levelling their own land. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners have also filed an affidavit of undertaking to the effect that they will not cut any trees from their land and further undertaken that they will not take even a handful of sand outside their patta land and only request the respondents to permit them to level their patta land.

(3.) A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode, the second respondent herein stating that after a representation was given by the petitioners on 18/1/2016 to the District Collector, Erode to grant them permission to level the ground soil and also to remove the ups and downs on the ground to enable them to carry on the agricultural work, the first respondent has not given permission to do even the levelling work. However, the petitioners started to do the levelling work in their field on 27/3/2016. In the meanwhile, Chennimalai Iyarkai Vala Padhukappu Iyakkam objected to the levelling work undertaken by the petitioners. Therefore, the Tahsildar, Perundurai Taluk conducted conciliatory talks with the members of the Iyarkai Vala Padhukappu Iyakkam along with the writ petitioners in the Perundurai Taluk Office and submitted a detailed report to the District Collector, Erode and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode informing both the respondents 1 and 2 that the land in question has been in an uneven portion, as the northern side of the land is highly elevated and the southern side is lying low. Although the petitioners have deposed before the authorities that they are only going to level the uneven patta land to do agricultural activities in their land, on an earlier occasion, in the year 2010, when one Mr.Sridhar got permission from the District Collector to dig out gravel soil from S.F.No.585, which is also lying adjacent to the land of the petitioners, the said Mr.Sridhar almost removed the gravel soil from the field. In view thereof, the same Iyarkai Vala Padhukaappu Iyakkam headed by its coordinator Mr.K.V.Ponnaiyan staged a big agitation and hunger strike on 10/6/2011 with the participation of senior politicians and 40 organizations in Chennimalai. A human chain agitation in and around Chennimalai was also conducted to save the hilly terrain of Chennimalai and also to safeguard the ecology of Chennimalai. In view of the above procession and meetings conducted by various pattadhars, the District Collector also rushed up a team of officials from the Geology and Mining Department headed by the Mining Director to inspect the quarrying field in S.F.No.585 and to measure the entire area from where the gravel soil was taken out. Based on the report, the District Collector, Erode also, after conducting enquiry with the licensee Mr.P.Sridhar, Kanjikoil Village, Perundurai Taluk on 27/6/2011, cancelled the licence granted to the said quarry licensee. Aggrieved by the said order, Mr.P.Sridhar also filed W.P.No.20877 of 2011 before this Court and this Court, by order dtd. 27/9/2011, directed the Commissioner (Geology and Mining), Chennai to consider the appeal preferred by Mr.P.Sridhar dtd. 5/7/2011 in accordance with law, following the procedure contemplated under the relevant rules, after affording reasonable opportunity to all parties concerned within six weeks. When the matter stands as above, the petitioners presented a petition to the first respondent on 18/1/2016 requesting permission to level the uneven patta land in S.F.No.582/2 in Chennimalai village. Since the petitioners have proceeded to level the land without obtaining prior permission during the pendency of their representation before the first respondent, based on the objections, the impugned order has been passed by the second respondent.