Judgment Heard both sides. 2. The writ petitioner Association has made a representation to the District Collector, the third respondent on 06.03.2008 for the purpose of allotment of lands to the petitioner Association in S.Nos.11/1A and 11/11 of Kaspapuram Village, Kanchipuram Taluk. It appears that the proposal for such allotment was pending for a long time even before the representation made by the Petitioner Association. A letter dated 19.06.2000 was addressed to the Tashildar, Tambaram viz., the fourth respondent by the Police Department requesting the Tahsildar to take action for acquisition and allotment of 85 plots for the Office Assistants Association. 3. The fourth respondent, the Tahsildar has filed a report before the third respondent, the District Collector on 19.06.2001 recommending the said proposal for granting 85 plots to the members of the petitioner Association in survey No.11/1 and 11/11 to the extent of 38. 5 hectares and 0.90.0 hectares respectively which were classified as Anadheenam dry by the Assistant Settlement Officer in the proceeding dated 31.01.1969. In the said proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 19.06.2001, the Tahsildar has fairly stated that the said portion of the property was claimed by one Natesa Thevar, the grandfather of the petitioner in W.P.No.36985 of 2006. That apart, the proceedings shows that there are no trees or buildings or burial grounds or monuments in the said lands and the lands are 900 metres away from the lands of the Airport Authorities. In fact, in the said proceedings, the fourth respondent the Tahsildar has also fixed the price of the lands. Thereafter there has been many communication between the police Department and the Revenue Department and ultimately the petitioner Association have given the above said representation dated 06.03.2008. 4. In the said representation, the petitioner Association have made it clear that the District Collector, the third respondent should consider the report of the Tahsildar and file necessary report to the Government so as to enable the Government to allot the lands for the benefit of the members of the petitioner Association. Since no action was taken, the petitioner Association by filing W.P.No.9375 of 2008 and this Court while disposing the said writ petition by an order dated 17.04.2008 has directed the District Collector to consider the representation of the petitioner Association dated 06.03.2008 and pass orders within the stipulated time. Since no action was taken, the petitioner Association by filing W.P.No.9375 of 2008 and this Court while disposing the said writ petition by an order dated 17.04.2008 has directed the District Collector to consider the representation of the petitioner Association dated 06.03.2008 and pass orders within the stipulated time. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court, the third respondent has passed the impugned order rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the grounds that in Survey No.11/11 in a portion, there is a burial ground which has been covered by the boundaries. That apart the another reason assigned for passing the impugned order by the District Collector is that the writ petition filed by the successor of Natesa Thevar in W.P.No.36985 of 2006 is pending before this Court. The impugned order shows that the fourth respondent has submitted a report on 07.08.2008 and it appears that in the report the fourth respondent has now chosen to state that there is a burial ground in existence and it is not possible to give away the properties to the petitioner Association. 5. On the factual matrix that there has been two divergent view of the Tahsildar, one dated 19.06.2001 wherein the Tahsildar has stated there is no burial ground and in the present report dated 07.08.2008, the Tahsildar has informed the Collector that there is a burial ground, I am of the considered view that the third respondent, the District Collector should be directed to find out the factual position and pass fresh orders. There is one another aspect in this case for the purpose of allotment of lands to the petitioner Association and it is for the first respondent to pass ultimate orders after the report of the District Collector. 6. In such view of the matter, the impugned order of the third respondent dated 06.02.2009 is set aside and the matter is remanded with a direction to the third respondent to effect proper inspection through his officials to find out the factual position of the burial ground and file necessary report to the first respondent and such report shall be filed by the third respondent within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, it is for the first respondent Government to pass orders on merits within a period of 6 months thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.