Madras High CourtK.Ramachandra Kurup vs The Secretary To Government on 5 March, 2015Author:T.S.SivagnanamBench:T.S.SivagnanamIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.03.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
W.P.NO.5537 OF 2015
& M.P.NO.1 OF 2015

K.Ramachandra Kurup						 .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The Secretary to Government,
    Revenue Department,
    Government of Tamil Nadu,
    Fort St. George,
    Chennai  600 009.

2. The District Collector,
    Thiruvallur District,
    Thiruvallur.

3. The District Revenue Officer,
    Thiruvallur District,
    Thiruvallur.

4. The Tahsildar,
    Poonamallee Taluk,
    Poonamallee, Chennai.

5. The President,
    Kattupakkam Village Panchayat,
    Kattupakkam, Chennai.						.. Respondents
* * *
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed underArticle 226of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents, their men, agents, servants, subordinates or any one acting under them from in any manner disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of lands by the Association known as Cine Technicians Association of South India in lands measuring about 0.18.0 hectares situate in Survey No.163, Kattupakkam Village, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District, other than by invoking the due process of law.
* * *
		For Petitioner	:	Mr.T.T.Ravichandran

		For Respondents	:	Mr.R.Vijayakumar
						Additional Govt. Pleader

O R D E RHeard Mr.T.T.Ravichandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials placed on record including the written instructions given by the Tahsildar, Poonamallee along with the supportive documents.2. The petitioner is an Association, which is said to be in possession of the land in question measuring about 0.18.0 hectares. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking to forbear the respondents from disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of lands by the Association.3. Admittedly, as on date, there is no order of assignment executed in favour of the petitioner association.  Therefore, even assuming that the petitioner is in occupation of the said land, it should be considered as unauthorised occupation. Further, it has to be noted that the revenue authorities, namely, the Tahsildar, Poonamallee, vide the proceedings dated 28.09.1999 has made certain recommendations recommending for grant of assignment in favour of the petitioner association to an large extent of lands comprised in various survey numbers in S.Nos.118 Part, 141, 144, 148, 160, 162, 163, 176/1 and 176/2. Admittedly, all these lands are government poramboke lands and they have been classified as Kalam Poromboke, Voikal poramboke and Meikal Poramboke.4. From the proceedings dated 28.09.1999, it is seen that the Tahsildar, Poonamallee has not suo motu recommended, but there is a reference to the proceedings of the District Collected, Thiruvallur, dated 17.08.1998, which itself was pursuant to a representation given by the President of the petitioner association during 1997-98. The representation on behalf association was for the purpose of developing the housing lay out for its members. The petitioner association is sated to have purchased an extent of 25 acres of land and those lands are adjoining lands to the above mentioned lands and they have been classified as Meikal poramboke lands and the association wanted to annexe these lands and promote a larger lay out.  Thus, the request made by the association appears to have been found favour with the government and consequently, the District Collector has passed the proceedings and the Tahsildar has made her recommendation on 28.09.1999.  From the said report, it is seen that the Tahsildar, being aware of the fact that all the lands are Poramboke lands, either Meikal or Voikal Poramboke, has chosen to recommend by saying that none of the said lands are put to use as per their classification.5. Even assuming that the poramboke lands, which are classified as Voikal Poramboke and Meikal poramboke have not been utilized, the same could not have been recommended for assignment. Be it as it may, the District Revenue Officer, Thiruvallur, has also passed a proceedings dated 13.10.2010 stating that for the purpose of granting the assignment certain formalities have to be complied with and that has to be done at the Government level.6. Further, it is seen that the petitioner has also remitted a sum of Rs.8300/- on 20.12.2013 and then submitted a representation dated 27.01.2015.  The written instructions given by the Tahsildar, Poonamallee, dated 05.03.2015 states that the land in S.No.163 in question is Meikal poramboke land and there is no building, in which allegedly functioning, belonging to the petitioner association in the said land and the Government has not taken any action to demolish in building.7. The copies of the chitta and adangal show that it is a Meikal poramboke land.  Further, it is stated that the proceedings have been initiated by the Kattupakkam Panchayat to call for tenders for the purpose of putting up of a Village Panchayat Service Centre in the said land.8. From the above facts, it is seen that at one point of time, the Revenue Department has considered the request made by the petitioner and made certain recommendations.  But, however, there is no document produced to show that the petitioner has been granted permission to enter upon the land.  Therefore, the alleged possession of the petitioner is unauthorized and illegal.9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has produced photographs to show that a part of compound wall has been demolished.  This, according to the respondents, is incorrect and there is some dilapidated structure in the said land.10. In any event, in the absence of any assignment as on date, there is no semblance of legal right for the petitioner to enter into the land. However, since from the records, it is seen that there are certain recommendations made earlier, the petitioner shall be vacated from the premises after giving 7 days notice, if the petitioner is in possession.11. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.05.03.2015
Index		: Yes / No
Internet	: Yes 
Note : Issue order copy on 06.03.2015
gg

To1. The Secretary to Government,
    Revenue Department,
    Government of Tamil Nadu,
    Fort St. George,
    Chennai  600 009.2. The District Collector,
    Thiruvallur District,
    Thiruvallur.3. The District Revenue Officer,
    Thiruvallur District,
    Thiruvallur.4. The Tahsildar,
    Poonamallee Taluk,
    Poonamallee, Chennai.T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.gg













ORDER IN         
W.P.NO.5537 OF 2015













05.03.2015