Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1874 (MAD)

D. Sekar v. District Collector, Salem

2022-07-04

N.ANAND VENKATESH

body2022
JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, To call for the records relating to Na.Ka.No.2813/2010/A6 dated 28.04.2010 passed by the 3rd respondent and to quash the same and to direct the respondents 1 to 7 respondents to restore the burial ground situated in S.No.64/4 measuring 0.24.5 Hectares out of larger extent of 1.41.0 Hectares under the possession of 8th respondent.) 1. This writ petition was filed by a resident of Vasantham Colony being aggrieved by the impugned memo dated 28.04.2010, issued by the 3rd respondent and for a consequential direction to the respondents to restore the burial ground in Survey No.64/4. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the lands in Survey No.64/4 was used as a burial ground by the residents of Vasantham Nagar from the year 2002 onwards. According to the petitioner, the Panchayat had permitted the lands to be used as a burial ground after passing a resolution. 3. It is stated that the 8th respondent filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.26917 of 2009 and sought for a direction to remove the graveyard at Survey No.64/4 and the Division Bench of this Court through an order dated 05.03.2010, disposed the writ petition by directing the revenue authorities to consider the representation made by the 8th respondent and to take a decision within four weeks after affording an opportunity to all interested parties. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent without calling for objections from the residents of Vasantham Colony proceeded to issue the impugned memo dated 28.04.2010 and thereby the residents were prevented from using the property in Survey No.64/4 as a burial ground. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition was filed before this Court. 5. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The relevant portions in the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder : 10. It is submitted that, it is false to state that those respondents are acting without applying their mind in respect of residents of Vasantham Colony, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Omalur. It is also false to state that the Survey No. 64/4, Parai Poramboke land of Kottagoundampatti Village is being used for burial ground by the said people. It is submitted that, it is false to state that those respondents are acting without applying their mind in respect of residents of Vasantham Colony, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Omalur. It is also false to state that the Survey No. 64/4, Parai Poramboke land of Kottagoundampatti Village is being used for burial ground by the said people. The Survey No. 64/4 of Kottagoundampatti is a 'Rock Poramboke' land in which the soil of the land is very less and it is a rocky area, and it is not been used as burial ground by the 7 respondent as well as by the revenue authorities. It is false to state that the said Survey No.64/4, Kottagoundampatti Village, Omalur Taluk is being used for the burial ground from the year 2002 onwards and so far more than 20 dead bodies were been buried over the said land. Already the 8th respondent by name Chinnathambi filed a writ petition in W.P.26917/2009 and in that petition the Honourable High Court of Madras passed a direction on 05.03.2010 and as per the said order, the revenue authorities were taken necessary steps and also the local Omalur Police registered a case in crime No.1093/2010 dated 13.12.2000 for the offence under section 147, 447, 188 and 332 of IPC against one Rajendran and 14 others and also putting a sign board in the said Survey No.64/4, Kottagoundampatti Village, Omalur Taluk by stating that the land should not be used for burial or cremation of dead bodies over the said land which absolutely belongs to the revenue authorities. Hence no public or any other person is allowed to use or exercise their Homage for the dead persons over the said Survey No.64/4 of Kottagoundampatti Village, Omalur Taluk. 11. It is submitted that, it is false to state that all the people residing is Vasantham Colony, Tamil Nadu Housing Board had to travel more than 16 Kilometors from their colony in the event of occurrence of death of any person. There is a large burial ground located in the same village at survey no's. 22/2. 23/1 and 23/2 at the extent of 1.90 acres and the burial ground is located within the adius of 1.5 Km from the Vasantham Colony of Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The above said burial ground is used for all communities residing in the village, including Vasantham Colony Tamil Nadu Housing Board. 23/1 and 23/2 at the extent of 1.90 acres and the burial ground is located within the adius of 1.5 Km from the Vasantham Colony of Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The above said burial ground is used for all communities residing in the village, including Vasantham Colony Tamil Nadu Housing Board. Already the Government authorities allotted the land in survey No. 22/2, 23/1 and 23/2 of Kottagoundampatti village for the said burial ground to exercise the funeral function of the dead persons belongs to the entire Kottagoundampatti Village. The said survey no.64/ was been mentioned in the village 'A' register by the revenue authorities as 'Mayanam'. Hence all the public are entitled to exercise their funeral functions of their persons in the burial ground located in the survey no. 22/2, 23/1 and 23/2. Hence the said survey no.64/4 should not be allotted for the said purpose as claimed by the petitioner herein. The said survey no 64/4 is situated in the centre portion of the residential area. If the said portion will be allowed for the purpose or burial ground, it will give more trouble and pin pricks to the entire public including the children on and the area and it will create law and order problems including environmental pollution. Already the 7th respondent made a claim over the said survey no.64/4, Kottagoundampatti village, Omalur Taluk for further development purpose of Tamil Nadu Housing Board and they also given a letter dated: 18.04.2013 to the Government and also deposit some amount for the said land transfer, if the said claim of the 7th respondent will be accepted by the Government, then automatically the said survey no.64/4 will be handed over to Tamil Nadu Housing Board, for their further utilities. 6. Heard Mr. M. Vivekanandan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. T.K. Saravanan, learned Government Advocate for R1 to R6 and Mr. D. Veerasekaran, learned Standing Counsel for R7. 7. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record. 8. It is an admitted case that the lands in Survey No.64/4 is classified as a Parai Poramboke in the revenue records. This property stands in the name of the Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The 'A' register that was produced before this Court clearly substantiates this fact. 8. It is an admitted case that the lands in Survey No.64/4 is classified as a Parai Poramboke in the revenue records. This property stands in the name of the Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The 'A' register that was produced before this Court clearly substantiates this fact. It was also brought to the notice of this Court that from the year 2010 onwards the lands in Survey No.64/4 were never permitted to be used as a burial ground for the last 12 years. It has also been mentioned in the counter affidavit that there is a large burial ground located in Survey Nos.22/2, 23/1 and 23/2 and this burial ground is situated 1.5 Kms, from Vasantham Colony. 9. This Court enquired the learned counsel for the petitioner as to what objections the residents of Vasantham Colony can have to utilise the burial ground which is situated only 1.5 Kms, from Vasantham Colony. The learned counsel on oral instructions submitted that the residents of Vasantham Colony are being prevented by the Village people belonging to Kottagoundampatti. In view of the same, the residents of Vasantham Colony are forced to travel long distance for the cremation of the dead body. 10. In the considered view of this Court, the residents belonging to Vasantham Colony cannot be permitted to use Survey No.64/4 as a burial ground for the simple reason that it has not been classified as a burial ground and it has only been classified as a Parai Poramboke. The fact that there is a burial ground available within a short distance of 1.5 Kms, from Vasantham Colony, is not disputed by the petitioner and the only grievance seems to be that the residents are prevented from using the burial ground by certain persons belonging to Kottagoundampatti Village. If such activities are prevented and the residents belonging to Vasantham Colony are able to have an easy access to the nearby burial ground at Survey Nos.22/2, 23/1 and 23/2, without giving rise to any law and order problem, there cannot be any real grievance in the impugned memo issued by the 3rd respondent. 11. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned memo issued by the 3rd respondent. 11. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned memo issued by the 3rd respondent. However, there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent to ensure that the residents belonging to Vasantham Colony are permitted to use the burial ground at Survey Nos.22/1, 23/1 and 23/2, without any hindrance and to take action against those persons, who prevent the residents of Vasantham Colony from using the burial ground. This direction will substantially take care of the grievance expressed by the petitioner. 12. This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.