WA/980/2026 of State of Tamil Nadu Vs K.M. Nalinishree on 9 October 2026

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) Under assail is the Writ order dated 23.01.2025 passed in W.P.No.32737 of 2024. State preferred the present intra-court appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent.

2. Respondents herein filed a Writ of Mandamus to direct the appellants herein to rectify the revenue records including the online patta in respect of the subject property comprising 3.89 acres in Survey Nos.66/2 and 67/2 and restore the name of the first petitioner in the online patta for the above survey numbers in line with the physical patta granted in Patta No.728 dated 24.12.2002. Writ Petition was allowed by the Writ Court. Therefore, State preferred the present appeal.

3. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellants would mainly contend that first respondent's husband claims to be the original assignee of land at free of cost by the Government under Ex-serviceman quota. However, Government found that lands assigned are Anadheenam lands and more so, forest areas. Since dispute arose regarding the classification and about the assignment made, several enquiries were conducted. Even the respondents herein are filing writ petitions on several occasions claiming patta in their name. Finally the Government formed an opinion that an enquiry is required to be conducted by a committee of enquiry. Accordingly,

Government

appointed

Hon’ble

Justice Mr.K.P.Sivasubramaniam (Retd.,), High Court to enquire the illegalities and irregularities in “Anadeenam lands involved in Thazhambur Village’ extent of 583.20 acres in Chengalpet District, Vandalur Talur. In this regard, Government issued G.O.Ms.No.126, Revenue and Disaster Management Department Land Reforms Wing, LR.2(1) Section, dated 03.02.2026. Thereafter, Government issued G.O.Ms.No.148, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Reforms Wing, LR.2(1) Section, dated 09.02.2026 fixing Terms of Reference to the Hon’ble Justice Mr.K.P.Sivasubramaniam (Retd.,), High Court. Relying on the said Government orders, learned Special Government Pleader would submit that the Committee constituted by the Government has to conduct a detailed enquiry regarding the illegalities and irregularities in the matter of grant of assignment of Anadheenam lands in Thazhambur Village and after taking a final decision, all appropriate actions will be taken by the Government.

4. Mr.R.Parthasarathy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents would contend that the subject portion of the land measuring to an extent of 3.89 acres was assigned in the name of the husband of the first respondent in the year 1967. After assignment, Forest Department claimed right over the assigned land. Thereafter, revenue authorities have granted an alternate land in the same Thazhambur village. Therefore, there is no impediment for grant of patta in the name of the first respondent. Second respondent is a Power of Attorney holder and a builder. First petitioner has already entered into a

Joint Venture Agreement with the second respondent for developing the land assigned by the Government in the name of the husband of the first respondent. Layout permission and planning permission were already granted by the competent authority. However, appellants herein are not granting patta in the name of the 1st respondent in respect of Survey No.67/2 measuring to an extent of 72 cents. Therefore, respondents have filed several writ petitions.

5. Learned Senior Counsel referred earlier orders passed in writ proceedings and contempt proceedings. Despite the orders of this Court, revenue authorities have not granted patta in the name of the 1st respondent. Thus, writ petition filed by the respondents was allowed by the writ Court in W.P.No.32737 of 2024, dated 23.01.2025.

6. This Court considered the rival submissions made between the parties to the lis.

7. Admittedly, it is a case of assignment of Government land in the name of an Ex-serviceman, i.e., the husband of first respondent in the present case. Assignment of land to Ex-serviceman was considered by Government under the assignment policy of Government as enunciated in 1949. Those days, value of the land was less and the very purpose of such assignment to Ex-serviceman is to ensure that after their retirement, they do agricultural activities to lead their livelihood. Purpose of assigning 5 acres of land in rural areas are only for agricultural purposes and not to develop commercial establishments or to make joint venture to earn money. The very noble purpose and object of assignment of Government lands in favour of the Ex-serviceman also is to be taken into consideration.

8. Public lands belong to we, people of India. Such Government lands are to be assigned to the needy, landless poor persons to lead their livelihood, and assignment of land for making personal gains would undoubtedly defeat the purpose and object of assignment of land under any scheme by the Government. Several years have gone and the market value of the land is now skyrocketing. Several rural areas now became urban areas, and the assigned lands, if utilised for any other purpose other than the purpose for which it has been assigned, Government is empowered to step in, initiate all appropriate actions, and cancel assignment.

9. Assignment of Government land is made on terms and conditions as stipulated under the Revenue Standing Orders. Therefore, assignee is expected to utilise the land only for the purpose for which it was assigned, and any violation would result in cancellation of assignment. Therefore, Government has to revisit the 1949 scheme and to ensure that the public lands are distributed to protect the livelihood of poor landless people to protect their livelihood. In the present case, the assigned land on account of long years has been handed over for development of building projects, and in the present case, first respondent entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with the second respondent / builder to construct multi-storeyed residential project.

10. Considering the fact that vast extent of land in Thazhambur village have been classified as Anadheenam lands and Government found certain irregularities and illegalities in dealing with such lands, constituted a Committee headed by Hon'ble Justice Mr.K.P. Sivasubramaniam, (Retd.,) Judge of Madras High Court. Terms of Reference also has been stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.148. Therefore, grant of patta at this juncture in favour of first respondent is not desirable. Terms of Reference made by the Government is to be answered by the Committee for initiation of all further actions in the matter. Patta is to be granted to the owner of the land. Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983 stipulates that owner of the land is eligible to submit application for grant of patta. In the present case, it is a Government assignment made on terms and conditions, and the Government has now decided to conduct an enquiry by appointing a retired Hon'ble Judge and the matter is sub-judice before the Committee. Therefore, High Court, issuing a direction to grant patta is unnecessary. In the event of existence of any dispute, High Court may not be in a position to issue a direction to grant patta. Disputed facts of civil rights cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding. High Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry on this nature of issues, where ownership is to be conferred. It is not a mere procedural aspect. The dispute in the present case is about the legality of assignment made as well as the classification of the land and other related matters. It requires an elaborate enquiry to be conducted and Government has rightly appointed a Committee consisting of Hon'ble Justice Mr. K.P. Sivasubramaniam, (Retd.,) High Court Judge.

11. In the event of issuing any direction by the High Court, it would cause prejudice to public interest, since it is an assigned Government/Forest land. Therefore, all further actions are to be initiated subject to the decision of the Government, which is to be made based on the report to be submitted by the Committee appointed in G.O.Ms.No.126, Revenue and Disaster Management Department Land Reforms Wing, LR.2(1) Section, dated 03.02.2026 and G.O.Ms.No.148, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Land Reforms Wing,

LR.2(1) Section, dated 09.02.2026.

12. In view of the facts and circumstances, impugned writ order WP.No.32737 of 2024 dated 23.01.2025 is set aside. Accordingly, writ appeal is allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (R.R.V.,J.) 09-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No GD

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND R.RAJESH VIVEKANANTHAN, J. GD WA No. 980 of 2026 09-10-2026