JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in proceedings Ref.D.Dis.K3/8110/07, dated 17.07.2008 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent through proceedings dated 17.07.2008. The Writ Petition came up for final hearing on 01.08.2022 and this Court passed the following order:- “This writ petition was filed challenging the impugned order of the 1st respondent through proceedings dated 17.07.2008. 2.It is seen from records that the petitioners were issued with patta during the UDR Scheme in Survey No.340/3C. This Patta was issued in the year 1985 in Patta No.949/1985 during the UDR Scheme. Ultimately, the 5th and 6th respondents made a complaint to the effect that they are the owners of Survey No.340/3C and they came to know about the patta issued in favour of the petitioners during the UDR Scheme only at a later point of time and accordingly, sought for the cancellation of the patta. The District Revenue Officer, conducted the enquiry and passed an order on 31.01.2006, wherein, it was held that the patta granted in favour of the petitioners under UDR Scheme was a mistake. This order was subsequently confirmed by the 1st respondent through impugned proceedings dated 17.07.2008. 3.The main stand that has been taken by the petitioners is that they were in possession and enjoyment of the property for nearly two decades in Survey No.340/3C. The official respondents, who have filed the counter have taken a stand that that the petitioners are actually in possession and enjoyment of the property in Survey No.340/3A and the property in Survey No.340/3C continued to remain as a vacant property. Even in the typed set of papers, there is no document available to ascertain the nature of possession that is claimed by the petitioners in the subject property. 4.In view of the above, the following clarifications are required before a final order can be passed in this writ petition. (a) The nature of possession of the petitioners in Survey No.340/3C. (b) The present status of the property in Survey No.340/3C. This information is required since the petitioners claimed that they were illegally evicted 20 years back without issuing any notice. (a) The nature of possession of the petitioners in Survey No.340/3C. (b) The present status of the property in Survey No.340/3C. This information is required since the petitioners claimed that they were illegally evicted 20 years back without issuing any notice. No interim order was passed by this Court at the time of entertaining the writ petition. (c) Whether the petitioners continued to be in possession and enjoyment of the property in Survey No.340/3A. and ; (d) The present status of the suit filed by the 5th and 6th respondents in O.S.No.28 of 2016, pending on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sholingur, wherein, the 5th and 6th respondents have sought for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction. The subject matter of the suit is Survey No.340/3C. 5.A status report shall be filed by the 4th respondent. Post this writ petition under the caption 'Part heard cases' on 12.08.2022.” 2. The matter was once again taken up for final hearing today and the learned Government Advocate submitted the written instructions received from the Tahsildar, Arakkonam. The Tahsildar, Arakkonam has answered the queries posed by this Court in the above order, as follows:- a) and b)-As on today, the property in survey No.340/3C is not occupied by anyone and shrubs and thorny bushes have grown all over the property. c) In so far as the possession of the petitioners is concerned, the Tahsildar, Arakkonam, has stated that they are in possession and enjoyment of survey No.340/3A and they have independently put up construction and residing there, and d)In so far as the suit filed by the fifth and sixth respondents in O.S.No.28 of 2016 is concerned, the same is said to be pending at the stage of examination of witnesses. 3. Heard Mr.Sunnysheen, the learned counsel for petitioners, Mr.T.K.Saravanan, the learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.D.Nellaiappan, the learned counsel for fifth and sixth respondents. 4. In the present case, the fifth and sixth respondents are claiming for independent title over the property situated at survey No.340/3C and it is stated that they continue to pay the land tax for the said property till date. 4. In the present case, the fifth and sixth respondents are claiming for independent title over the property situated at survey No.340/3C and it is stated that they continue to pay the land tax for the said property till date. The right and title over the property is now a subject matter in the suit and hence the conclusion arrived at by the competent civil Court will have a lot of bearing to decide the inter-se rights claimed by the parties. As such the property in survey No.340/3C is not physically occupied by anyone and presently it is uninhabitable. The order passed by the DRO and which has been made a subject matter of challenge in this Writ Petition will also be subject to the final result that will be arrived at by the competent civil Court in the civil proceedings. This is in view of the fact that the fifth and sixth respondents are claiming independent right and title over the property and the UDR patta granted in favour of the petitioners was cancelled by the DRO by recognizing such right and title of the fifth and sixth respondents. Therefore, this conclusion of the DRO will be subject to the judgment and decree to be passed in the pending suit. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following terms:- a)the present status of the property in survey No.340/3C shall continue till the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.28 of 2016, pending on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sholingur. b)the order passed by the DRO and which was confirmed by the first respondent through proceedings dated 17.07.2008, shall come into force subject to the result in O.S.No.28 of 2016, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sholingur. c)the reasoning given by the DRO while cancelling the UDR patta and which was subsequently confirmed by the first respondent, shall not have any bearing on the civil Court while deciding the suit and the civil Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law. d)the order passed by the DRO and which was subsequently confirmed by the first respondent, shall become effective only subject to the final result in the suit in O.S.No.28 of 2016 and the possession and enjoyment over the property will also be subject to the final result in O.S.No.28 of 2016. d)the order passed by the DRO and which was subsequently confirmed by the first respondent, shall become effective only subject to the final result in the suit in O.S.No.28 of 2016 and the possession and enjoyment over the property will also be subject to the final result in O.S.No.28 of 2016. e)the District Munsif, Sholingur, is directed to dispose of O.S.No.28 of 2016, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.