Judgment :- (S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.) These Writ Petitions in public interest have been preferred by the petitioner as against the proceedings of respondents-1 and 3 in Na.Ka.No.2/25185/2005, dated 29. 2005, and Na.Ka.No.475/79(A), dated 30.09.2005, whereby, pattas have been granted in favour of various persons including respondents 4 to 10 herein. 2. It appears that about 80 families were originally residing in Arasampalayam village on the banks of River Cauvery at Namakkal District and they requested the State Government to provide them with alternative accommodation as they could not reside there for various reasons. In the year 1983, the land in question was acquired by proceedings in Sa.Na.S. No.220/1B A.4/77. Pattas were issued in favour of 69 families including the petitioner. Thereafter, more pattas were issued. According to the petitioner, when the people living in Arasampalayam colony came to know that pattas were going to be issued, they made representation. All those who did not have any house-site were allotted lands on the western side in S. No.219/P.A., Arasampalayam Village, Namakkal District, to an extent of 3.85 acres after acquiring the land. House sites were allotted to 96 families in the said village apart from the 69 house sites allotted in the year 1983. Thus, out of the total extent of land acquired, house sites were allotted to 69+96=165 families and balance land of about 1 acre was earmarked for communal purpose. Now, it is alleged that pattas have been issued to 30 families including contesting respondents-4 to 10 in respect of the land earmarked by the District Harijan Welfare Department for communal purpose. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid pattas have been issued against the lay-out plan prepared in 1983, whereunder, rest of the land measuring one acre was earmarked for communal purpose and that the M.L.A. (Member of Legislative Assembly) of the constituency had also allotted funds for construction of a community hall over the land in question meant for communal purpose and such being the state of affairs, if the impugned order of allotment of pattas is allowed to continue, it will defeat the purpose for which the land was originally earmarked ie, for communal purpose. 4. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents, by pointing out that all those who have been allotted pattas vide impugned order had not been impleaded as party respondents, would submit that the Collector, after due verification and enquiry, made it clear by his order dated 26.09.2005 that all the 30 persons had put up huts in the rest of the place which is earmarked for public purpose and community hall and temple was there as much as no land is necessary for future purpose and social purpose. It is informed therein that pattas have been granted in favour of 30 persons after cancelling the patta earlier granted to them at S. No.219/B and it will not affect the land which is meant for public purpose. 5. In the present case, it appears that pattas have been allotted in favour of respondents-4 to 10 and some others who belong to Adi Dravida Community (Scheduled Caste). When the petitioner and others, who are already residing there and belonging to the same category, having been granted patta in the year 1983, we are of the view that no public interest is involved so as to call for any interference. It is made clear that if funds had already been allotted by the Member of Legislative Assembly concerned, the Collector may allow the construction if land for communal purpose is available in the site. Writ Petitions are dismissed accordingly. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.