Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 93 (MAD)

N. R. Radhakrishnan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By The Secretary Department Of Revenue Fort St. George Chennai-9.

2012-01-05

VINOD K.SHARMA

body2012
Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, for directing the respondents 1 to 4 to implement the G.O.Ms.No.453 (Revenue Department) dated 30.1.1961, the letter of the Collector of Madras A2.4442/61 dated 18.8.1961, and Transfer of Charge Certificates issued by the Firka Revenue Inspector-Mambalam, by making necessary changes in revenue records, and by issuing pattas in favour of the petitioners. 2. The petitioner is the Ex-Director of Nungambakkam Co-operative House Building Society Limited, (hereinafter referred to as the society), Chennai. The Government of Tamil Nadu assigned the lands in R.S. No. 795/pt and R.S.No. 604 in Nungambakkam Village, Madras South Taluk, Madras District vide order G.O.Ms. No. 453 dated 30.1.1961 in favour of the petitioners society for the purpose of construction houses by the members of the society, subject to the payment of Rs.2000/-(Rupees two thousand only) per ground towards land value. 3. In pursuance of the order passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu, the Collector of Madras vide his order dated 18.8.1961 directed the society to remit the amount of Rs.1,17,555.83/- (Rupees one lakh seventeen thousand five hundred and fifty five and eighty three paise only) towards the market value of the land and confirming that the land would be handed over to the society on receipt of the amount. 4. The condition was complied with, and the society deposited the assessed amount. 5. After the receipt of the sale consideration, the Firka Revenue Inspector (Mambalam), Madras Taluk, handed over the lands comprised in R.S.No. 795 part measuring C.1.9.0778 sq.ft. and in R.S.No. 604 measuring C.1.1.1089 sq.ft on 31.8.1961 and 4.1.1962 respectively to the society through his Vice President and also issued transfer of charge certificates, showing sketches of the lands. 6. After taking the possession of the land, the society prepared the lay out for the said properties by dividing them into 48 plots. This was also sanctioned by the Commissioner of Corporation of Madras and approved by the Director of Town Planning on 28.5.1993. 7. The plots were demarcated and allotted to the members of the society. The Urban Land Tax imposed on the land was also paid by the society. 8. The members of the society also constructed houses on allotted plots. 9. 7. The plots were demarcated and allotted to the members of the society. The Urban Land Tax imposed on the land was also paid by the society. 8. The members of the society also constructed houses on allotted plots. 9. In view of the admitted facts, the petitioner made a request to the respondents to enter the name of the petitioners in the Revenue records and also to give patta to the petitioners so as to remove any cloud on the title of the petitioners. 10. After making repeated requests, the petitioners have approached this court, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to fulfill their statutory obligation. 11. On notice, a counter has been filed wherein the stand of the respondents is that the petitioners have applied for patta after lapse of 50 years and that the permanent land register of Egmore – Nungambakkam Taluk office shows the land in question to be that of Government. Therefore, it will not possible to issue patta in favour of the petitioners. 12. The stand taken by the respondents shows that the request of the petitioners is being denied, only for want of record, though factual position referred to above is not disputed. The stand of the respondents therefore is totally misconceived and not sustainable in law. It is not open to the authority, not to act as per the statute, merely on the plea that the records is not available. It is the duty of the authorities in such a case to reconstruct the record. In the case on hand, all the details and factual position has been disclosed with particulars of letters as also Government orders, which are not disputed. It is also not disputed that in pursuance to assignment by the Government, as per direction of the Collector, sale consideration has been made and necessary statutory sanctions granted to construct houses on the allotted land. 13. In view of the undisputed facts, and in view of the documentary evidence on record, there is absolutely no justification on the part of the respondents not to accept the request of the petitioners. 14. The conduct of the respondents can neither be accepted nor appreciated. 15. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. 13. In view of the undisputed facts, and in view of the documentary evidence on record, there is absolutely no justification on the part of the respondents not to accept the request of the petitioners. 14. The conduct of the respondents can neither be accepted nor appreciated. 15. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The writ in the nature of mandamus is issued directing the respondent to issue a patta and to enter the name of the petitioners in the Revenue records. The exercise be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 16. The petitioners shall also be entitled to cost of this petition which is assessed at Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only).