Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 160849 (MAD)

Krishna Rao G S v. The Commissioner of Land Administration

WP(MD)/24635/2023 · 2025-10-13

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :13.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 and WMP (MD) Nos.20824, 20825 & 20826 of 2023 1. Krishna Rao G.S 2. Suresh.R 3. Ramesh.S.K 4. Uma Maheswari.K.K 5. Bhuvaneswari.O.S 6. Pradeepa.M.P 7. Nirmala.S.K 8. Shanthi.A.S 9. P.K.K.Ramkumar, 10. Vairam.R.S 11. Rajagopalan.G.V 12. Babulal.G.R 13. Ramachandran.M.R 14. Sridhar.M.K ... Petitioners 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 Vs. 1. The Commissioner of Land Administration, O/o.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2. The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District. 3. The Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, Rep. by its Superintending Engineer, No.169, K.K.Nagar Main Road, Madurai. 4. The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District. ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Order in Na.Ka.No.54382/2004/J2 dated 23.01.2023 on the file of the respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to grant patta for the petitioners for lands in their occupation in T.S.No.1974/2 in Ward No. 1, Block No.98 Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District. For Petitioner :Mr.M.Mahaboob Fazil for M/s.Lajapathi Roy and Associates For Respondents :Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate for R1, R2 & R4 Ms.S.Latha for R3 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 O R D E R An order dated 23.01.2023 of the District Collector is challenged in this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been residing in lands in T.S.No.1974/2 for a considerable period of time. Learned counsel submits that the lands originally stood in the names of Isthiaksha Sahib and Sarguru as trustees of Keelamathur Pallivasal. After the enactment of the Tamil Nadu Minor Imams [Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari] Act, 1963, it is stated that the lands were resumed and re-classified as 'Nathan Poramboke' lands. In those circumstances, a representation was made to the District Revenue Officer under G.O.(Ms.) No.303, Commercial Tax and Religious Endowments Department, dated 24.03.1987. Eventually, the representation was rejected by the impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record G.O. (Ms.) No. 97, Revenue and Disaster Management (LD-1) Department, dated 21.02.2025. He points out that all earlier government orders, including G.O.(Ms.) No.318, were taken into consideration while issuing 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 this order. He points out that the order provides for the grant of patta in respect of unobjectionable poramboke lands. By referring to the communication from the Corporation, he points out that no objection has been given by the Corporation. 4. Learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. He points out that there are a very large number of persons in occupation of these lands. He submits that orders would be passed on merits by taking into consideration G.O.(Ms.) No. 97. 5. G.O.(Ms.) No. 97 has been issued on 21.02.2025. G.O.(Ms.) No. 97 takes note of G.O.(Ms.) No. 318. It classifies poramboke land into unobjectionable government poramboke lands and objectionable poramboke lands vested with local bodies. As regards unobjectionable poramboke lands, it enables regularisation if the extent is less than three cents. It also prescribes the requirements that the lands should be occupied for a minimum period of at least ten years. 6. In view of the issuance of G.O.(Ms.) No. 97, a case is made out for reconsideration of the request made by the petitioners herein. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms: 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 (i) Each petitioner may submit a fresh representation in terms of G.O.(Ms.) No. 97 to the jurisdictional Tahsildar for the forwarding thereof to the District Collector. Such representation shall be submitted within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) Upon receipt of such representations, the District Collector is directed to pass fresh orders by taking into account G.O.(Ms.) No. 97 within six months from the date of receipt of such representations. It is needless to say that these representations shall be considered without reference to order dated 23.01.2023. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 13.10.2025 NCC :No Internet :Yes Index :No PKN 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 To 1. The Commissioner of Land Administration, O/o.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2. The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District. 3. The Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, Rep. by its Superintending Engineer, No.169, K.K.Nagar Main Road, Madurai. 4. The Tahsildar, Madurai South Taluk, Madurai District. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. PKN W.P.(MD)No.24635 of 2023 13.10.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis